WmB 


m'^iW 


'  lliiii 


;;^.^> 
V  ^'^ 


i',i^^ 


♦1       v»^  \ 


.  -. .  ^f  ^ 


pM<M^>^^'^  -^^ 


r  2 


(  '\ 


■    « 


«  .    .  -.:i.r    .  %,% 


^^fe-v*^' 


'  \ 


i  ^ 


.J.  , 


V--' 


(oi    L^-^ 


|<t^H:^«,.  iM^^d 


i 


r>-^ 


/?  /,   / 


/s 


,Jix.     ,  .   -  IP  - 1 

,            ^?/ 

^.. .., 

<5^ 

PROFESSOR    PHELPS'    WORKS. 


THE  THEORY  OF   PREACHING;  or,  Lectures  on  Homiletlcs. 

Cr.  8vo $2-5» 

MEN  AND  BOOKS,   or.  Studies  in  Homiletics.     Lectures  intro- 

ductory  to   *  Theory  of  Preaching."     Cr.  8vo 2.00 

ENGLISH  STYLE  IN   PUBLIC  DISCOURSE.    With  special  refer- 

ence  to  the  Usages  of  the  Pulpit.     Cr.  8vo 2.00 

MY  PORTFOLIO.    Collection  of  Essays.     i2mo 1.50 

MY  STUDY,  and  other  Essays.     i2mo  .    •••«•.•••  1.50 

MY   NOTE-BOOK.     12010 1.50 


LIFE  OF  AUSTIN  PHELPS.  A  Memoir.  By  his  Daughter, 
Elizabeth  Stuart  Phelps  [Mrs.  lVard'\.  Illustrated. 
Cr.  Svo 2.i 


THE 


THEORY  OF  PREACHmG 


LECTURES   ON   HOMILETICS 


BT 


AUSTIN  PHELPS,  D.D. 

LATE  BARTLET  PROFESSOR  OP  SACRED  RHETORIC  IN  AKDOTSR 
THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARY 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER^S  SONS 
1908 


K 


Copyright,  1881, 
Bt  CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  S01»8l 


PREFACE, 


Two  methods  of  discussion  are  practicable  to  an  in- 
structor in  homiletics.  They  are  called,  not  very  accu- 
rately, the  practical  and  the  scientijic  methods.  These  terms 
are  open  to  the  objection,  that,  on  a  theme  like  this,  a  scien- 
tific treatise  must  be  infirm,  if  it  is  not  also  practical ;  and  a 
practical  treatise  must  be  equally  infirm,  if  it  is  not  also 
scientific. 

Yet  these  terms  do  convey  a  hint  of  the  elements  which 
preponderate  in  the  two  modes  of  discussion.  By  the  one, 
homiletics  is  treated  chiefly  as  a  science,  and  is  developed 
chiefly  by  scientific  analysis,  and  in  its  relation  to  kindred 
sciences.  The  resulting  treatise  is  valuable  to  a  student 
mainly  as  a  means  of  mental  discipline.  It  would  be 
formed,  ultimately,  on  the  model  of  Aristotle's  system  of 
rhetoric.  By  the  other  method,  homiletics  is  treated,  not 
unscientifically  indeed,  yet  with  regard  chiefly  to  its  practical 
uses.  The  German  theologians,  with  greater  accuracy  of 
terms  than  that  of  our  American  nomenclature,  consider  it  a 
branch  of  "practical  theology.'*  Such  it  undoubtedly  is. 
Thus  defined  and  developed,  it  would  form  a  treatise  valua- 
ble to  a  student  chiefly  as  a  practical  guide  and  help  to  tht 

Ui 


f 


Iy  pbefacb. 

work  of  the  pulpit.  The  one  of  these  methodfl  of  treat- 
ment is  the  more  apt  to  the  study  of  the  scmux  for  the  pur- 
pose of  liberal  culture  only :  the  other  is  the  more  necessary 
to  the  study  of  the  art  in  a  professional  seminary. 

For  reasons  quite  obvious,  I  have  chosen  the  second  of  the 
two  methods  here  indicated,  in  the  construction  of  the  pres- 
ent volume.  Very  soon  after  I  began  to  lecture  in  the 
department,  I  formed  the  habit  of  preserving  manuscript 
notes  of  the  inquiries  of  students  in  the  lecture-room  and  in 
private  conversations.  Those  notes  soon  grew  upon  my 
hands  immensely.  Answers  to  those  inquiries  constitute 
nine-tenths  of  this  volume.  Whatever  value  my  work  may 
possess  is  due  largely  to  the  fact  that  it  is  a  growth  from 
such  practical  resources,  suggested  by  practical  minds,  eager 
in  their  youthful  outlook  upon  the  most  practical  of  the 
liberal  professions,  approaching  it  with  intensely  practica* 
aims,  and  prompt  to  put  the  instructions  they  might  receive 
to  immediate  practical  uses.  It  would  have  been  difficult  to 
engage  such  hearers  with  any  enthusiasm  in  listening  to  a 
purely  scientific  treatise,  orally  delivered,  on  such  a  theme. 
Of  all  subjects  for  the  lecture-room,  literary  criticism  pure 
and  simple  is  the  most  inert.  It  must  fall  flat,  even  from 
the  lips  of  genius. 

I  have  carried  the  subordination  of  scientific  to  practical 
inquiry  so  far,  that  I  have  often  used  the  analysis  of  a  ser- 
mon as  a  line  of  suggestion  to  which  to  attach  matter  of 
practical  moment  related  to  the  theory  of  preaching,  yet  not 
strictly  a  part  of  it.  From  this  liberty  of  discussion  has 
arisen  the  feature  of  excursus^  which  will  be  observed  in  the 
structure  of  these  lectures.  In  this,  also,  I  have  followed 
the  lead  of  the  actual  inquiries  of  my  pupils. 


PREFACE.  ▼ 

By  retaining  the  forms  of  oral  delivery  in  the  publication 
of  this  work,  I  have  aimed  to  make  it  (though  necessarily 
with  large  omissions  and  condensations,  especially  of  illus- 
trative material)  as  nearly  as  possible  an  exact  transcript  ol 
the  work  of  my  lecture-room.  As  such  it  is  offered,  with 
very  kindly  recollections,  to  those  who  are  still  living  of  the 
more  than  twelve  hundred  students,  who,  in  the  course  of 
thirty -one  years,  have  given  me  their  patient  and  attentive 
hearing;  of  whom  I  gratefully  record  the  fact,  that  not  a 
solitary  exception  has  ever  given  me  occasion  for  rebuke  or 
admonition. 

While  thus  constructed  primarily  for  professional  readers, 
this  volume  will  be  found  to  contain  much,  I  hope,  which 
will  be  of  interest  to  thoughtful  laymen.  My  hearers  in  the 
lecture-room  will  bear  me  witness  that  I  have  never  lost 
sight  of  that  large  and  increasing  portion  of  our  laity  who 
have  very  pronounced  ideas  of  their  own  of  the  true  theory 
of  preaching,  however  little  they  may  know  or  care  for  its 
scientific  forms.  I  have  recognized  the  fact  that  to  their 
experienced  judgment  my  own  work  must  be  ultimately  sub- 
mitted in  the  life's  work  of  my  students  ;  and  that  no  theory 
of  a  sermon  can  be  worth  discussion,  which  does  not  succeed 
in  adjusting  preaching,  as  a  practical  business,  to  the  large 
common  sense  of  Christian  hearers. 

It  is  due  to  Professor  M.  Stuart  Phelps  that  I  should 
•cknowledge  his  vigilant  and  scholarly  aid  in  the  revision  of 
my  manuscript,  especially  in  making  the  necessary  elimina- 
tions of  material,  and  in  otherwise  editing  the  present  work. 

AiTDOVXs  Theological  Skmtnabt 
March,  1881. 


TABLE   OF   CONTENTS. 


LECTURE  L 

THB  SERMON  :    ITS  OENERIO  U>EA. 

HomUetlai  defined;  its  Relation  to  Rhetoric  — A  Sermon  It  tuk 
Oral  Address;  To  the  Poprdar  Mind;  On  ReligiooB  Truth;  A» 
contained  in  the  Scriptures 1 

LECTURE  n. 

THE  sermon:  its  generic  idea. 

A  Sermon  is  on  Truth  elaborated;  How  to  account  for  the  Power 
of  Spontaneous  Preaching.  — A  Sermon  is  constructed  with  » 
View  to  Persuasion;  Distinct  from  Poetry;  From  DisceurM 
merely  Intellectual  or  Emotive.— The  Pulpit  and  the  Stage 
distinct ^ 

LECTURE  m. 

THE  sermon:  classification,  analysis. 

Homiletic  Classification  founded  on  Mode  of  Delivery;  On  Occ*- 
■ions;  On  Subjects;  On  the  Character  of  the  Audience;  On 
Faculties  of  Mind;  On  the  Use  of  the  Text;  On  the  Mode  of 
treating  the  Subject.  —  Sermons  Explanatory;  Illustrative; 
Argumentative ;  Persuasive.  —  Analysis  of  a  Sermon:  The  Text; 
Explanation;  Introduction;  Proposition;  Division;  Develop- 
ment; Conclusion • 

Til 


J$US9^    ^^    ^^ 


? 


it 


fiii  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

LECTURE   IV. 

THE    TEXT  :     HISTORY,   USES. 

History  of  the  Custom:  Jewish  Origin;  Christian  Usage;  Bomish 
Corruption ;  Modern  Theory.  —  Objections.  —  Positive  Uses:  To 
give  Inspired  Authority;  To  promote  Popular  Knowledge  of 
the  Scriptures;  To  cherish  Attachment  to  the  Language  of  the 
Bible;  To  facilitate  Remembrance  of  Truth ....  44 

LECTURE  V. 

THE   text:    USES,   SOUBCES. 

Usea:  To  aid  Introduction;  To  promote  Vanety;  To  f  8"4H:  Unity. 
— Sources:  May  we  select  an  InterjMDlation  or  Miptram^tion' 
The  Afltonative  Argument;  The  Negative  Argument.  — Mv 
we  select  Uninspired  Sentiments?    The  Affirmative  defended. 

—  Cautions <ll 

LECTURE  VI. 
^   /^*-^  THE  text:  fobms,  febsficuitt. 

iV  Must  a  Text  be  a  Grammatical  Sentence  ?    Decision  of  G<k)4  T^ate. 

—  Can  any  Principle  reg'ilate  the  Length  of  Texts?  Advan- 
tages  of  Long  Texts;  Advantages  of  Short  Texts;  General  Prin- 
ciple.—  May  we  choose  for  one  Sermon  more  than  one  Text? 

—  Should  Choice  be  restricted  to  Perspicuous  Texts?  Such 
Texts  have  Advantages.  —  Obscure  Texts  have  Advantages. — 

OftUtiOBB « 

LECTURE  Vn. 

THE  TEXT  :    EMOTION,   DIGNITY,  NOYELTY,   FERSONALITT. 


^ 


Bhonld  we  choose  Texts  of  Lofty  Emotional  Character?— Difficul- 
ties of  Such  Texts;  Answer  Affirmative.  —  What  is  Essential  to 
the  Dignity  of  a  Text  ?  —  The  Principles  involved.  —  What  Prin- 
ciples should  govern  the  Choice  of  Novel  Texts  ?  Hackneyed 
Texts  sometimes  necessary;  Novel  Texts  preferable.  —  May  we 
choose  a  Personal  Text  ?  —  How  to  avoid  Personality 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS.  fX 

LECTURE   Vm. 

,  ^  ^    -THB  text:  pertinency,  completeness,  accommodation. 

^311  what  Principles  shall  we  judge  of  the  Pertinency  of  a  Text?  — 
Congruity  of  Sentiment ;  Of  Rhetorical  Structure ;  Of  Associa- 
tion. —  What  Principles  should  regulate  Completeness  and 
Redundancy  in  Texts?  — The  General  Rule;  IIow  to  treat  a 
Redundant  Text.  —  May  we  use  Accommodated  Texts?  —  What 
3  Accommodation?  —  Three  Principles:  which  approved,  and 
which  condemned,  by  Good  Taste.— Accommodation  defended    101 


LECTURE  IX. 

the    text  :    ACCOMMODATION,    MOTTOES,    MISCELLANIES. 

Cautions  in  the  Use  of  Accommodated  Texts.  —  May  we  use  Motto- 
Texts?- What  is  a  Motto-Text  ?  — Defense  of  Motto-Texts; 
Cautions.  — Miscellanies:  Where  should  be  the  Place  of  the 
Text  ?  —  Should  a  Text  be  repeated  in  Announcement  ?  —  What 
the  Order  of  Announcement  ?  —  What  the  Preface  in  Announce- 
ment ? IS 

LECTURE  X. 

THE   explanation:    DEFINITION,   OBJECTS,   MATERIALS. 

Explanation  distinct  from  an  Explanatory  Sermon:  From  the  Pro- 
cess of  Investigation;  From  Exegesis  in  a  Commentary;  From 
Exposition  in  an  Expository  Sermon.  —  The  Objects  of  an  Ex- 
planation: Verbal  Criticism;  Logical  Adjustment;  Rhetorical 
Amplification.  —  Sources  of  Expository  Material:  The  Words 
of  the  Text;  The  Immediate  Context;  The  Scope  of  the  Argu- 
ment; Historical  and  Biographical  Literature  of  Texts;  Com- 
parison of  Texts  with  ParaUel  Passages.  —  The  Application  of 
Common  Sense  to  Exegesis  131 

LECTURE  XI. 

THE    EXPLANATION  :    MATERIALS,    QUALITIES. 

BouTces  of  Exposition:  The  Facts  of  Natural  Science;  Whatshonld 
be  Homiletic  Policy  where  Science  conflicts  with  Scripture?— 
The  Qualities  of  Exposition:  It  should  give  the  True  Meaning 
ol  the  Text •  1« 


X  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

LECTURE  Xn. 

THE   EXPLANATION  :    QUALITIES. 

'  FAQl 

Aji  Exposition  should  give  Full  Force  to  the  Meaning  of  the  Text; 
It  should  not  exaggerate  a  Text. —It  should  be  Clear.  — It 
should,  if  possible,  express  Fositiye  Opinions       .       .       .       .    m 

LECTURE  Xin. 

THE   EXPLANATION  :    QUALITIES. 

Ajq  Exposition  should  preserve  Unity  of  Interpretation;  Ways  in 
which  its  Unity  may  be  sacrificed.  —  An  Explanation  should  be 
Concise:  Value  of  Conciseness  in  Exposition;  Ways  in  which 
it  is  sacrificed.  —  An  Exposition  should  preserve  the  Dignity  of 
Inspired  Thought.  —  Unnecessary  Exposition.  —  Fanciful  Ex- 
position         178 

LECTURE  XIV. 

THE   explanation:    QUALITIES,   LOCALITY. 

h.n  Exposition  must  be  made  Interesting;  It  should  be  Free  from 
Certain  Scholastic  Weaknesses;  It  should,  if  possible,  be  in 
Keeping  with  the  Rhetorical  Structure  of  the  Text.  —  It  should 
be  so  constructed  as  not  to  excite  Frivolity.  —  It  should  be  such 
as  to  suggest  a  Definite  Theory  of  Inspiration.  —  It  should  sug- 
gest the  Proposition.  —  In  a  Topical  Sermon  it  should,  if  possi- 
ble, bring  the  Text  to  bear  upon  the  Conclusion.  —  It  should  be 
varied  on  Different  Occasions.  —  The  Locality  of  the  Explana- 
tion       ISI 

LECTURE  XV. 

excursus:  the  bible  beryicx. 

Does  Biblical  Instruction  require  a  Change  in  the  Present  Services 
of  the  Sabbath  ?  —  The  Ancient  Routine;  The  Early  Preaching 
of  New  England.  —  A  Silent  Revolution  in  the  New  England 
Pulpit.  —  Decline  of  the  Double  Service.  —  Pastoral  Leadership 
in  Biblical  Instruction  should  be  restored.  — Change  in  One  of 
the  Two  Preaching  Services  desirable.  —  The  **  Bible  Service." 
—  A  Pastor's  Experiment;  A  Pastor's  Advice      ....    201 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS.  Zl 

LECTURE  XVI. 

THE   INTRODUCTION  :    THEORY,  SPECIFIC   OBJECTS. 

FAQB 

The  Theory  of  the  Introduction:  Relation  to  Other  PreliminarieB; 
To  the  Mental  State  of  the  Audience;  Of  the  Speaker.  —  Spe- 
cific Objects  of  an  Introduction;  To  secure  the  Good  Will  of  an 
Audience  towards  the  Preacher;  The  Power  of  Person  in  Popu- 
lar Speech :  To  stimulate  the  Attention  of  Hearers ;  Disadvan- 
tages of  the  Pulpit.  —The  Interest  of  Curiosity;  Directed  to  the 
Subject  in  Hand;  In  a  Natural  Way.  — To  dispose  Hearers  to 
receive  favorably  the  Sentiments  of  a  Sermon;  Disadvantages 
of  Preachings  Methods  by  which  the  Popular  Mind  may  be  pre- 
possessed    2M 

LECTURE  XVn. 

THE  INTRODUCTION:    SIMPLICITY,   UNITY,  DIRECTNESS} 
CONGRUITY. 

Simplicity:  Ways  in  which  it  is  sacrificed.  Unity:  Defined;  D©es 
not  exclude  Diversity;  Aid  of  the  Oratorical  Instinct;  Double 
Introductions.  — Directness:  Rapidity  of  Progress;  Directness 
not  Abruptness;  Exceptions.  —  Congruity  with  the  Character 
of  the  Sermon;  Ways  in  which  Congruity  may  be  sacrificed     .    231 

LECTURE  XVm. 

THE  INTRODUCTION  :    MODESTY,   8UGGE8TIVENE88. 

ICodesty  in  the  Introduction  and  (by  Excursus)  in  all  Oral  Discourse. 
—Ways  in  which  Modesty  is  violated  in  the  Pulpit;  Ways  in 
which  it  may  be  preserved.  —  Suggestiveness :  How  it  may  be 
promoted;  How  overwrought.  —  Excursus:  Is  it  expedient  to 
preface  a  Sermon  by  Remarks  upon  Topics  of  Current  Interest  ?    253 

LECTURE  XIX. 

THE   introduction:    varieties,  COMPOSITION. 

The  Approach  without  an  Introduction;  The  Introduction  applicftr 
tory  of  the  Text;  Intensive  of  the  Text  by  Comparison  with 
Other  Scriptures;  Explanatory  of  Principles  involved  in  the 
Discussion;  Narrative  of  Facts  Necessary  to  an  Appreciation 
of  the  Subject;  Connective  with  the  Preceding  Discourse;  Con- 
densed Review  of  Another  Subject  related  to  that  of  the  Ser- 
mon; Request  for  the  Attention  of  the  Audience.— Hints  on 
the  Work  of  composing  the  Introduction 2M 


Xn  TABLE  OF  CONTENTa 

LECTURE  XX. 

THE  PROPOSITION  :    DEFINITION,  NECESSITY. 

FAOS 

The  Proposition  defined.  —  Is  the  Statement  of  a  Proposition  Nece». 
aaiy  ?  Demanded  by  the  Oratorical  Instinct:  By  the  Instinct  of 
Good  Hearing;  By  the  Nature  of  Spoken  Address;  By  Unity 
of  Impression;  By  the  Nature  of  the  Subjects  of  the  Pulpit. — 
The  Popular  Tendency  to  Confusion  of  Religious  Thought ; 
Mission  of  the  Pulpit.  —  Preaching  must  use  freely  the  Expe- 
dients of  Logic;  Their  Necessity  to  the  Theological  Faith  of  the 
People;  The  Best  Analytic  Methods  sometimes  fail.  —  The 
Proposition  in  Other  Departments  of  Oratory      .       .       .       .    28S 

LECTURE  XXI. 

TBE  PROPOSITION:    NECESSITY,  BUBSTANCB. 

Does  the  Necessity  of  a  Proposition  admit  of  Exceptions  ?  Politic 
Concealment.  —  What  Principles  should  regulate  the  Substance 
of  a  Proposition?  — Unity;  Varieties  of  Unity;  Excellence  of 
Unity.  — Congmlty  of  Proposition  with  the  Text       ...    291 

LECTURE  XXn. 

THE  PROPOSITION:    SUBSTANCE. 

The  Proposition  in  Substance  Identical  with  the  Body  of  the  Ser- 
mon; Should  not  contain  Excess  of  Material;  Importance  of 
Restriction  of  Theme;  Comprehensive  Themes;  The  Prcpoel- 
tion  should  not  contain  too  Little  Material  for  Impressive  Dis- 
cnssion;  Diminutive  Themes 800 

LECTURE  XXm. 

THE  proposition:    SUBSTANCE,    FORMS. 

todecisive  Reasons  for  Restriction  of  Subject.— A  Proposltioii 
should  not  comprise  Different  Material  from  that  which  is 
discussed  In  the  Sermon.  —  Varieties  of  Defect  in  this  Respect. 
—Varieties  of  Form  in  Propositions;  Logical  and  Rhetorical; 
Affirmative  and  Negative;  Declarative  and  Interrogative;  Sim- 
ple, Complex,  and  Plural.  —  The  Interchangeableness  of  these 
Forms  .,.- 331 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS.  xiij 

LECTURE  XXIV. 
THE  proposition:  simplicitt. 

PAOB 

The  Form  should  be  Simple;  Unintelligible  or  Doubtful  Wordi; 
Scientific  Terms;  Technicalities  of  Philosophy  and  Theology; 
Figurative  Statements;  The  Forms  of  Popular  Proverbs;  Fan- 
tastic Forms;  Extreme  Paradox 330 

LECTURE   XXV. 

THE  PROPOSITION  :   BREVITY,  SPECIFICNE88,  ELEGANCE,  ITS 
PREFACE. 

Brevity  ol  Proposition;  Needless  Synonyms;  Needless  Epithets; 
Circuitous  or  Indolent  Grammatical  Construction;  Repetition 
in  Varied  Language;  Relation  of  Proposition  to  Conclusion; 
Propositions  consisting  of  the  Divisions  of  the  Sermon. — A 
Proposition  should  be  Specific;  Choice  between  the  Forms;  A 
Proposition  should  be  a  Complete  Idea  in  itself;  Not  stated  in 
the  Exact  Language  of  the  Text;  Not  specifying  any  thing 
not  discussed  in  the  Sermon.  ~  A  Proposition  should  be  framed 
with  Elegance;  Vocabulary,  Classic  English;  Construction, 
Pure  and  Fluent  English.  —The  Preface  to  the  Proposition:  Its 
QuaUties 349 

LECTURE  XXVI. 

THE   DIVISION  :    NECESSITY,   EXPRESSION. 

Are  Divisions  Necessary  in  a  Sermon  ?  Should  they  be  stated  ? 
Objections;  Advantages.  —  They  promote  Perspicuity,  Com- 
prehensiveness, Unity,  Progress,  Conciseness,  Elegance,  Brevi- 
ty, Interest,  Permanence  of  Impression.  —  How  far  should  Di- 
visions be  Visible  ?  Regulated  by  the  Nature  of  the  Subject; 
By  the  Character  of  the  Discussion;  By  the  Character  of  the 
Audience;  By  the  Time  at  Command 381 

LECTURE  XXVn. 

THE   DIVISION:    EXPRESSION,   MATERIALS. 

4.lmfte8  of  Divisions;  Arbitrary  Number;  Lawless  Multiplication; 
Uniformity;  Needless  Subdivision;  Fitness  to  Speaker  alone; 
Excess  above  Need  of  Elaboration;  Excess  beyond  Rhetorical 
Force.  —  The  Materials  of  Divisions:  A  Division  should  l»e 
Necessary  to  the  Development  of  the  Proposition;  It  should 
fully  develop  the  Proposition;  Divisions  should  consist  of  the 
meet  Powe^^ll  Thoughts  discovered  by  Mastery  of  Subject      .     883 


XIV  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

LECTURE  XXVm. 

THE   DIVISION  :    MATERIALS,   FORMS. 

PAQB 

Dlvisiona  should  be  classified,  If  possible,  upon  One  Principle; 
Should  be  susceptible  of  Unity  of  Development;  Those  of  the 
Body  of  the  Sermon  should  not  anticipate  Those  of  the  Conclu- 
Bion;  Those  of  the  Conclusion  should  not  return  upon  Those 
preceding;  Should  be  as  Suggestive  as  possible  of  the  Proposi- 
tion.—Forms  of  Propositions  and  of  Divisions  Subject  to  the 
Same  Principles;  Divisions  should  be  adjusted  to  Proposition; 
Suggestive  of  Each  Other;  Not  easily  confounded  with  Eacb 
Other;  Truthful  in  their  Connections 391 

LECTURE  XXIX. 

THE   DIVISION  :    FORMS,    ORDER,    ANNOUNCEMENT. 

Divisions  should  foster  Expectation;  Should  be  varied  in  Form. — 
Varieties  of  Order:  Order  of  Logical  Necessity;  Of  Cause  and 
Effect;  Of  Genus  and  Species;  Of  Intrinsic  Dignity;  Of  Psycho- 
logical  Analysis;  Of  Time;  Of  Weight  of  Argument;  Of  Pro- 
gressive Intensity.  —  The  Mode  of  announcing  DivisionA  .       .    411 


LECTURE  XXX. 

THE   DEVELOPMENT  :    DEFINITION,    PREREQUISITES,    CHAR- 
ACTERISTICS. 

The  Development  defined. —  The  Prerequisites  of  a  Good  Devel- 
opment: Possession  of  Right  Quantity  and  Quality  of  Materials; 
Judicious  Choice  of  Method  of  Discussion;  How  to  judge  of 
this;  A  Mental  Dexterity  acquired  only  by  Practice.  —  The 
Characteristics  of  a  Good  Development:  Unity;  Unconsciona 
Discussion  of  Different  Things 121 


LECTURE  XXXI. 

THE    DEVELOPMENT  :    CHARACTERISTICS. 

Unity  concluded ;  Intentional  Digressions. —  Pertinency:  Ways  In 
which  it  is  sacrificed.  — Completeness;  Ways  in  which  it  la 
sacrificed.  —  Conciseness:  Methods  of  promoting  it.  —Order. — 
Proportion  ;  Relation  of  Divisions  to  Each  Other ;  Reserved 
Force  439 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS.  XV 

LECTURE  XXXn. 

THE    CONCLUSION  :    UEFINITION,   CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS. 

The  Conclusion;  Its  Characteristic  Idea.  —  Causes  of  "Weakness  in 
Applications;  Want  of  Consecration  in  the  Preacher;  The  Li- 
turgic  Element  in  Preaching;  Want  of  Faith  in  the  Doctrine  of 
Eetiibution;  Belief  without  Faith;  Consecration  not  Imitabl© .    451 

LECTURE  XXXin. 

THE   CONCLUSION  :    CAUSES   OF   WEAKNESS. 

Inordinate  InteUectnality;  ElBfeminate  Tastes;  Fear  of  Fanaticism; 
Conservatism  of  Educated  Preachers  ;  Their  Opposition  to 
Bevivals;  A  Theology  which  can  not  be  preached;  Objections 
answered 409 

LECTURE  XXXIV. 

THE  CONCLUSION:    CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS. 

SuccesB  of  Preachers  who  hold  an  Impracticable  Theology;  The 
Evangelical  Theory  of  Application;  Intensity  of  the  Evangel- 
ical Theology;  Preaching  Superior  to  Secular  Eloquence  .       .    483 

LECTURE  XXXV. 

THE  CONCLUSION  :  APPLICATIONS  OMITTED,  CONTINUOUS 
AND  COMPACT. 

Ought  Applications  ever  to  be  omitted  ?  —  Excursus :  on  the  Use  of 
the  Benediction.  —  Continuous  and  Compact  Applications: 
Reasons  for  preferring  the  Compact  Application. — Excursus: 
The  Duty  of  the  Pulpit  to  Those  who  are  repelled  from  its 
Message  by  Some  of  its  Methods «    491 

LECTURE  XXXVL 

THE  CONCLUSION :  RADICAL  ELEMENTS,  RECAPITULATION, 
INFERENCE  AND   REMARK. 

What  are  the  Radical  Elements  of  the  Conclusion  ?— -Defense  of 
the  Inference  and  Remark:  On  what  Principles  to  select  and 
combine  the  Elements  of  the  Conclusion;  How  to  conduct  Re- 
capitulation; How  to  conduct  the  Inference  and  Remark  .       .    618 


xvi  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

LECTURE  XXXVn. 
THK  conclusion:  inference  and  bebiabk,  appeals, 

EXCURSUS. 

PAOB. 

Haw  to  conduct  the  Inference  and  Remark:  Ought  Inference  to 
be  derived  from  Inference  ?—  Ought  Inference  to  be  in  Contrast 
with  the  Sermon  ?  —  Inferences  Convergent,  or  Divergent  ?  — 
How  should  Appeals  be  conducted?  Founded  on  Wiat?  — 
Productive  not  of  Conviction  only;  Aimed  at  the  Will;  True 
to  Vital  Duties.  —  Excursus :  Danger  of  Exhorting  to  Acts  which 
laL  short  of  God's  Commands 63Q 

LECTURE  XXXVm. 

THE  CONCLUSION  :    EXCURSUS,   APPEALS. 

Danger  of  exhorting  to  Acts  which  fall  short  of  God's  Commands. 
—  Speciflc  Appeals M7 

LECTURE  XXXIX. 

THE   CONCLUSION  :    APPEALS. 

Sell-possession  Ln  Appeals;  Earnestness  in  Appeals;  Expectant 
Appeals;  Natural  Elocution  in  Appeals;  Genuineness  in  Ap- 
peals; Brevity  in  Appeals;  Versatility  in  Appeals;  Appeids 
without  Forewarning 660 

LECTURE  XL. 

CONCLUDING    LECTURE:    MINISTERIAL  CULTURE. 

1!he  Calvinistic  Theory  of  Preaching:  Present  "Working  of  that 
Theory;  Drifting  of  the  Pulpit  from  the  Lower  Classes;  Need 
of  Consecrated  Culture.  —  Preaching  a  Missionary  Work  .    57f 

APPENDIX. 

■OMILETIC   AND   PASTORAL   BTUDISS. 

INDEX. 


^  ^THEORY    OF    PREACHING:   ^^ 

_  ,    LECTUKES  ON  HOMILETICS.     ,   vL 
LECTURE  I. 

THE  SERMON:   ITS   GENERIC  IDEA. 

HoMiLETics  js^the  science  which  treats  of  the  nature    >♦ 
the  classification,  the  analysis,  the  construction,  and  the  j     .    - 
composition   of   a   sermon.     More   concisely  it  is  the  *  ^^UA' 
science  of  that  of  which  preaching  is  the  art,  and  a  ^^ 

sermon  is  the  product.     What,  then,  is  the  relation  of 
homiletics  to  rhetoric  ?     Homiletics  is  rhetoric,  as  illus-        ^  /• 
trated  in   the   theory   of  preaching.     Rhetoric   is  the       ^   C  ^ 
genus :  homiletics  is  the  species.  ^-^ 

I.     What  is  the  generic  idea  of  a  sermon?    It  may  _, 

be  expressed  in  cumulative  form  in  the  following  theses. 

1st,  A  sermon  is  an  oral  address.  It  is  something 
distinct  from  an  essay  or  a  book.  If  well  constructed, 
it  has  peculiarities  of  structure  adapting  it  to  oral 
delivery,  and  in  some  respects  unfitting  it  for  private 
reading.  In  this  respect  a  sermon  illustrates  the  radi- 
cal idea  of  all  true  eloquence.  It  must  be  conceded  tc 
the  advocates  of  exclusively  extemporaneous  preach* 
ing,  that  the  extemporaneous  ideal  is  the  true  one  of 


0 


2  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  Llect.  i 

Derfect  public  speech.  A  perfect  orator  would  nevei 
write :  he  would  always  speak.  The  mutual  magne- 
tism between  speaker  and  heater  would  bear  him  on, 
without  the  aid  of  manuscript  or  memory.  The  custom 
of  preaching  written  discourses  grows  out  of  mental  in- 

'  firmities.  In  any  form  of  speech,  be  it  written  or  oral, 
we  make  but  an  approximation  to  perfect  oratory ;  and 
the  true  policy  of  the  pulpit  is  to  combine  the  weight 
of  material  which  the  pen  commands  with  the  ease,  the 
versatility,  tbe  flexible  expression,  and  the  quickness 
of  transition  which  belong  to  good  extemporaneous 
speech.  The  ideal  sermon  aims  to  blend  the  ^jualities 
of  the  essay  with  those  of  the  speech.  That  is  like  min- 
gling the  properties  of  a  solid  and  a  fluid :  but  in  the 
paradoxical  union,  the  fluid  has  always  the  ascend- 
ency. The  sermon  is  a  speech  before  it  is  any  thing 
else.  Nothing  else  should  deprive  it  of  the  qualities  of 
speech.  The  oral  elements  of  a  sermon  usually  grow, 
in  a  preacher's  estimate,  with  the  growth  of  his  experi- 
ence. Dr.  Archibald  Alexander  of  Princeton  aban- 
doned the  pen  entirely  in  his  later  years,  when  time 
had  given  him  command  of  accumulated  materials,  so 
that  he  could  always  extemporize  from  a  full  mind. 
He  once  said,  that  if  he  were  on  trial  for  his  life,  and 
hiii  acquittal  depended  on  a  single  effort  of  his  own,  he 
would  trust  to  his  lips  rather  than  to  his  pen. 

2d,  A  sermon  is  an  oral  address  to  the  popular  mind. 
rt  is  distinct  from  a  scientific  lectureT'from  a  judicial 
oration,  from  a  harangue  to  a  rabble,  from  a  talk  to 
children.  .The  best  test  of  a  good  sermon  is  the  instir.ct 
of  a  heterogeneous  audience.  That  is  not  good  preach- 
ing which  is  limited  in  its  range  of  adaptation  to  select 
.audiences:  be  it  select  intelligence,  or  select  ignorance, 

\  t  matters  not.     The  pvlpit  permits  no  selection.     It 


LECT,  I.]  THE  SERMON :   ITS  GENERIC  IDEA.  3 

exists  not  for  the  few,  not  for  the  many  as  distinct 
from  the  few,  but  for  all.  No  other  variety  of  public 
speech  is  so  cosmopolitan  in  its  freedom  from  provincial 
limitations  as  that  of  the  pulpit.  To  a  good  preachei 
his  field  is  literally  the  world :  it  is  the  world  of  real 
life,  not  the  world  of  books  alone,  not  the  world  of  the 
streets  alone,  but  the  world  as  it  is  in  its  completeness 
and  range  of  character  and  station.  He  finds  his  audi- 
ence wherever  he  finds  men  and  women  and  children. 
No  order  of  mind  is  above  him,  none  beneath  him. 
This  pop  liar  element  in  the  ideal  of  a  sermon  is  so 
fundamental,  that  it  should  be  incorporated  into  every 
definition  of  the  thing. 

But  is  not  this  a  degrading  idea  •  of  a  serman  ?  Do 
we  not  let  down  the  intellectual  level  of  the  pulpit 
by  insisting  upon  its  cosmopolitan  mission  ?  Is  it  not, 
at  the  best,  a  condescension  of  intellect  to  usefulness, 
when  a  preacher  addresses  his  whole  life's  work  to  the 
necessities  of  promiscuous  assemblies?  Is  it  not  a 
nobler  thing  to  do  to  preach  to  select  hearers,  whose 
culture  shall  give  scope  to  a  preacher's  loftiest  intellec 
tual  aspirations  ?  These  queries  are  fundamental  to  the 
usefulness  of  the  pulpit.  A  false  theory  respecting  it 
is  secretly  embarrassing  and  depressing  many  a  preacher 
in  his  life's  work.  It  is  a  sad  thing  for  a  man  to  labor 
all  his  life  long  under  the  weight  of  a  conflict  between 
professional  usefulness  and  personal  culture.  Yet  such, 
if  I  mistake  not,  is  the  secret  consciousness  of  many 
pastors.  In  some  it  amounts  to  a  sense  of  intellectual 
degradation.  Dai^el  Webster,  in  the  closing  years  of 
his  life,  expressed  a  profound  sense  of  personal  humilia- 
tion in  having  been,  through  his  whole  career,  so  largely 
engaged  in  the  delivery  of  electioneering  speeches.  If 
he  had  followed  the  bent  of  his  tastes,  he  would  never 


4  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [i.Ecr.  » 

have  spoken  in  public  outside  of  the  United  States 
Senate  or  the  Supreme  Court  Room.  Sometliing  akin 
to  this  feeling  weighs  upon  the  spirits,  and  depresses 
the  self-respect,  of  not  a  few  most  useful  pastors. 

Let  us  see,  then,  how  this  matter  stands.  Is  the  popu- 
lar character  of  the  pulpit,  in  the  Christian  ideal  of  it, 
degrading  to  it  as  a  representative  of  intellect  and  as  a 
stimulus  to  intellectual  culture  ? 

(1)  It  must  be  conceded  that  the  affirmative  is 
susta  Jied  by  the  notions  current  among  many  literary 
pjen.  Multitudes  of  literary  men  deny  to  the  pulpit 
the  dignity  of  literature.  In  their  view,  it  stands 
below  the  level  of  literary  criticism.  Nothing  else  fares 
so  severely  at  the  hands  of  popular  critics,  nothing  else 
is  criticised  so  flippantly,  nothing  else  is  doomed  so 
often  by  foregone  conclusions,  or  so  surely  "damned 
with  faint  praise,"  as  a  volume  of  sermons  from  a 
living  and  useful  pulpit.  We  are  all  infected  with  this 
disease  of  critical  judgment  in  the  conceptions  which 
we  often  mean  to  express  by  the  phrase  "popular 
preaching."  "  He  is  a  popular  preacher,"  we  say,  with 
an  inflection  which  me*ans  that  this  is  the  least  respecta- 
ble thing  about  him.  "  Is  he  a  man  of  talents  ?  "  —  "  Oh, 
yes !  of  popular  talents.  He  takes  well  with  the  multi- 
tude ;  he  draws  an  audience ;  women  weep,  and  chil- 
dren listen,  when  he  speaks;  he  can  always  be  sure 
of  a  hearing;  but "  —  and  so  on.  A  reverent  reader  of 
the  Scriptures,  it  is  true,  will  be  reminded  of  Him 
whom  the  common  people  heard  gladly;  yet  the  tone 
of  literary  disparagement  will  linger  a  long  time  in  our 
ears,  notwithstanding.  A  positive  stiffening  of  self- 
respect  is  often  needful,  that  a  pastor  may  hold  his  head 
erect  against  the  flings  of  criticism.  Such  criticism  is 
literary  cant. 


LKOT.  I.]  THE  SERMON :    ITS  GENERIC  IDEA.  6 

(2)  This  leads  me  to  observe,  that  the  great  excellence 
of  a  sermon,  considered  as  a  specimen  of  literature  alone, 
is  that  it  sways  mind  without  distinction  of  class.  So 
far  as  this  aim  is  reached,  it  is,  in  kind,  the  grandest 
thing  in  literature.  To  make  the  deep  thoughts  of  the- 
ology intelligible  to  all  orders  of  mind,  and  impressive 
to  them  all,  so  that  the  same  truth  which  instructs  the 
ignorant,  and  quickens  the  torpid,  shall  also  move  the 
wisest,  and  command  the  most  alert,  is  a  masterly  work 
of  mind.  Not  a  tithe  of  the  standard  literature  of  the 
world  achieves  any  thing  so  profound  or  so  brilliant. 
Plato  could  not  have  done  it,  but  St.  Paul  did  it.  The 
profoundest  discoveries  of  ethical  science  were  made 
intelligible,  and,  what  is  vastly  more  important,  were 
made  regenerating  forces  of  thought  in  the  minds  of 
fishermen,  by  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  Yet  all  the 
philosophy  which  the  world  reveres  bows  before  the 
originality  of  that  sermon  to-day.  Was  there  intellec- 
tual degradation  in  that  ?  As  much  as  in  the  humblest 
labor  of  a  successful  pulpit. 

Much  to  the  purpose  here  is  an  opinion  which  Guizot 
has  recorded  of  the  nature  of  genius.  In  his  criticism 
of  the  English  drama,  he  expresses  his  idea  of  genius 
in  words  which  are  true,  without  abatement,  of  the 
Christian  pulpit.  He  says,  "  Genius  is  bound  to  follow 
human  nature  in  all  its  developments.  Its  strength 
consists  in  5nding  within  itself  the  means  of  satisfying 
the  whole  of  the  public.  [It]  should  exist  for  all,  and 
should  suffice  at  once  for  the  wants  of  the  masses  and 
for  the  requirements  of  the  most  exalted  minds."  What 
is  this,  but  preaching  the  gospel  to  every  creature,  be- 
coming all  things  to  all  men,  doing  in  the  simplicity  of 
faith  that  which  every  successful  preacher  does  in  the 
result  of  his  life's  work?     This,  then,  we  pronounce 


6  THE  THEORY  OF  PREAJHING.  [lect.  i 

the  intellectual  dignity  of  the  pulpit.  Why  not,  as  well 
as  of  the  drama  ?  Considered  as  the  subject  of  philo- 
sophical criticism,  the  genius  of  the  pulpit  corresponds 
to  the  genius  of  that  poetry  which  is  world-wide  and 
immortal.  A  good  sermon  is  a  popular  production  in 
the  same  sense  in  which  a  good  drama  is  a  popular  pro- 
duction.  A  good  preacher  is  a  man  of  the  people  in  the 
same  sense  in  which  Racine  and  Shakespeare  were  men 
of  the  people.  Any  thing  which  grows  out  of  scholastic 
cilture  alone,  valuable  as  it  may  be,  is  still  below  the 
genius  which  sways  the  people  from  the  pulpit,  in  the 
same  sense  in  which  Aristotle  was  below  Homer,  and 
Locke  below  Milton. 

(3)  From  this  view  it  follows  that  the  sense  of  self- 
denial  which  preachers  sometimes  express  in  adapting 
their  sermons  to  all  classes,  instead  of  ministering  to  a 
select  intelligence,  has  no  virtue  in  it.  Says  one  of 
twenty  pastors  of  like  mind,  in  a  private  letter,  "  I  am 
throwing  myself  away  in  this  shoe-town."  Very  well . 
he  probably  could  not  make  a  better  throw.  If  he 
sa^es  a  "shoe-town"  morally,  he  lifts  it  up  intellec- 
tually to  an  immense  altitude.  In  the  process  of  doing 
that,  he  lifts  his  own  mind  to  a  level  of  culture  and  of 
power  which  no  conservatism  of  refinement  ever  rises 
high  enough  to  overlook.  Do  not  the  first  ten  inches 
of  an  oak  from  the  ground  measure  as  much  in  height 
as  the  last  ten  of  its  topmost  branch  ?  When  will  the 
ministry  learn  that  the  place  where  has  very  little  con 
cern  with  the  intellectual  worth  of  the  work  done? 
The  uplifting  anywhere  is  essentially  the  same,  but 
with  the  chances  of  success  all  in  favor  of  lifting  low 
down.  To  the  mind  of  Christ  the  whole  world  is  a 
"shoe-town"  intellectually.  To  give  it  a  lift  every- 
where is  the  intellectual  glory  of  the  pulpit.     Deliver 


'  • 


LBCfT.  i.j  THE  SERMON :   ITS  GENERIC  IDEA.  7 

ance  from  the  pettiness  of  a  select  ambition  is  essential 
to  the  power  to  lift  it  anywhere.  If  a  man  is  swaying 
a  promiscuous  assembly  every  week,  albeit  they  have 
waxed  and  grimy  hands ;  if  he  is  really  moving  them, 
educating  them,  raising  them  by  the  eternal  thoughts 
of  God  up  to  the  level  of  those  thoughts,  -  he  is  doing 
a  grander  literary  work,  with  more  power  at  both  ends 
of  it,  than  if  he  were  penned  in  and  held  down  by  the 
Slite  of  a  city,  or  the  clique  of  a  university.  He  is 
plowing  a  deeper  furrow,  and  subsoiling  the  field  of 
all  culture.  The  reflex  influence  of  his  work  upon  his 
own  development  is  more  masculine.  He  is  a  nobler 
man  for  it  in  intellectual  being.  There  is  more  of  him 
in  the  end.  He  has  more  to  show  for  his  life's  work, 
and  more  of  himself  to  carry  into  eternity. 

Doddridge  speaks  with  dolorous  magnanimity  of 
the  effort  which  it  cost  him  to  discard  from  his  style 
certain  words,  metaphors,  constructions,  which  his  lit- 
erary" taste  tempted  him  to  use,  but  which  his  con- 
science rejected  as  unsuited  to  the  capacities  of  his 
hearers.  This  was  mourning  the  loss  of  useless  tools. 
Such  condescension  is  in  the  direct  line  of  scholarly 
elevation.  A^an^rows  in  literary  dignity  with  every 
conquest  of  that  kind  which  he  achieves  over  himself. 
It  oiight  not  to  be  suffered  to  put  on  the  dignity  of  a 
self -conquest :  it  should  be  the  intuition  and  the  joy  cf 
a  cultivated  taste. 

(4)  An  appreciation  by  the  ministry  of  the  dignity  of 
popular  success  in  preaching  tends  to_elevate  the  intel- 
lectual culture  of  the  people.  The  popular  mind  grows 
undeFany  ministry  which  respects  it.  Mental  strength 
grows  under  ministrations  which  are  addressed  to  men- 
tal strength.  Treated  as  if  worthy  of  respect,  the  com- 
mon people  become  the  more  worthy.     Such  preaching 


7 

8  THE  THEORY  UF  PREACHING.  [lect.  i 

always  creates  a  wakeful,  thinking  commonalty.  No 
matter  how  low  it  begins  in  the  social  scale,  it  always 
builds  upward^  Historians  of  the  American  Revolu- 
tion express  astonishment  at  the  extent  to  which  the 
most  profound  principles  of  government  were  familiar 
to  the  reasonings  of  the  common  people  of  New  Eng- 
land at  that  period.  Otis  and  Adams  and  Ames  nevei 
could  have  argued  as  they  did  with  a  people  who  had 
not  been  trained  by  a  ministry  whose  pulpit  had  laid 
out  its  strength  on  the  people.  They  knew  no  *'  high  " 
and  "  low  "  in  the  aims  of  their  preaching .y  They  acted 
on  the  principle  of  common  sense,  that,  in  building  up 
any  thing,  the  building  process  is  as  valuable  at  the 
bottom  as  at  the  top,  and  that  the  bottom  may  be  the 
more  vital  to  the  stability  of  the  structure.  Thus  act- 
ing, with  no  consciousness  of  literary  theory,  they  hit 
upon  one  of  the  axioms  of  literary  taste ;  that  the  most 
useful  thing  for  its  purpose  is  the  best  thing  of  its  kind. 
Therefore  their  congregations  were  what  they  were,  — 
the  foundation  and  the  pillars  of  a  State. 

Viewed  thus  in  every  light  of  which  it  is  susceptible, 
the  true  ideal  of  a  sermon  is  reflected  back  upon  us 
as  a  production  which  is  popular  in  the  sense  of  being 
independent  of  class,  and  therefore  as  belonging  to  the 
first  rank  of  literature.  Let  us  admit  this;  let  us 
model  our  preaching  upon  it.  As  builders  of  men,  let 
us  respect  ourselves,  and  respect  our  work,  in  building 
low  down,  and  in  using  the  tools  which  our  business 
requires.  Let  us  count  that  as  the  most  perfect  litera- 
ture, which  is  most  perfectly  adjusted  to  the  most  per- 
fect ends  by  the  most  perfect  uses  of  the  materials  and 
the  arts  of  speech.  Let  us  cultivate  in  this  respect  the 
literary  taste  of  Christ.  Can  you  conceive  of  him  a^ 
^laboring  under  the  burden  of  literary  enthusiasm   to 


r>»A^ 


improve  and  polish  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  or  the    tiZ^" 
Beatitudes,  or  the  Lord's  Prayer,  by  adapting   them    *^^/ 
more  tastefully  to  the  upper  classes  of  Judaea?    Let  Jj/^ 
this  mind  be  in  you  which  was  also  in  Christ  Jesus.  ^)Uil 

od,  A  sermon  is  an  oral  address  to  the  popular  mind,  j^TT/ 

wpon  religious  truth.     This  is  too  obvious  to  need  fur-    J 

^ther  remark  than  to  observe  two  things.     One  is,  that       ^  J 
this  quality  distinguishes  a  sermon  from  secular  lec- 
tures.    Political,  historical,  scientific,  literary  discourses 
may  be  popularized  in  their  materials  and  forn^  and 
may  be  orally  delivered:  the  religious  theme  and  dis- 
cussion are  necessary  to  constitute  the  sermon.     The 
other  is,  that  nothing  is  a  sermon  which  is  out  of  the      )/ 
range  of  the  religious  necessities  of  the  people.     Use-      «^ 
fulness  of  discourse  does  not  make  preaching.     Theo-    (J 
dore  Parker  once  discoursed,  on  a  Sabbath  morning,     / 
upon  the  "Prospects  of  the  Democratic  Party  in  Amer-      7/^ 
ica. "     It  may  have  been  a  truthful  and  useful  oration,  A%*^ 
but  it  was  not  a  sermon.     It  was  not  religiously  useful. 

No  religious  necessities  of  his  audience  called  for  its   ^ 

delivery.  j''X^\f\ 

4th,  A  sermon  is  an  oral  address  to  the  popular  P'i^\ 
mind,  upon  religious  truth,,  as  contained  Jn_jhe_Chri8* 
tian  Scriptures.  Truth  is  confamedin  the  Bible  by 
expression  and  by  implication.  In  either  mode  it  has 
the  biblical  sanction.  Inspiration  recognizes  sources 
of  religious  knowledge  outside  of  itself.  A  sermon, 
therefore,  may  follow  the  line  of  biblical  recognition, 
as  well  as  that  of  the  inspired  record.  A  special 
significance  appertains  to  this  alliance  of  the  sermoii, 
in  every  form  and  theme  of  it,  with  the  word  of  God. 
This  will  be  evident  from  observing  that  natural  theol- 
ogy is  best  adjusted  to  the  uses  of  the  pulpit  when 
it   breathes   most   heartily   the   biblical   spirit.     Ot»'y 


10  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.  [leoT.  l 

when  Christianized  in  spirit  and  in  form  does  the  reli- 
gion of  nature  become  on  any  large  scale-  the  power  of 
God  unto  salvation.      The   most   corrupt   civilizations 
the  world  has  ever  seen  have  existed  in  the  midst  of  its 
most  impressive  natural  scenery.  fA  temple  of  Venus, 
the  scene  of  the  most  revolting  orgies  of  Pagan  cultus^ 
stacd  in  one  of  the  most  exquisite  valleys  of  South- 
ern Italy,  where,  if  anywhere,  one  would  suppose  that 
nature   would  have   led   men  to   a   spiritual  worship.  ) 
This  is  a  symbol  of  the  fate  of  natural  theology  every- 
where, when  it  is  left  alone  to  contend  with  the   de-        *  * 
pravity  of  the  human  heart.     Be  it  ever  so  true  or  so   ^  ,  .• 
pure,  abrasion  with  depravity  wears  it  dim,  and  wears  . 

it    out,   except   when   it   is   delivered   in   its   biblical       ^* 
forms,  and  supported  by  its  biblical  auxiliaries.     God 
in  Christ,  or  no  God  at  all,  is  the  alternative  suggested 
by  the  religious  history  of  mankind. 

The  identity  of  a  sermon  with  scriptural  types  of 
thought  is  emphasized,  also,  by  the  fact  that  preaching 
owes  its  existence  to  revealed  religion.  It  is  a  remark- 
able fact  that  the  religion  of  nature  isolated  from  the 
Scriptures  has  never  been  preached  on  any  large  scale. 
Sporadic  cases  are  of  no  account.  Natural  religion 
creates  philosophers,  and  founds  academies;  it  pro- 
duces priests,  and  builds  temples;  it  pictures  and 
carves  itself  in  symbols  and  ceremonies :  but  it  has  no 
chu£i2^es,  no  pulpits,  no  preachers.  Vinet  says  very 
truly,  "  There  is  no  Mohammedan  church,  nor  Brah- 
man ical  ;  and  certainly  there  was  no  church  in  the  reli- 
gion of  Homer."  Natural  religions  all  end  where  Chris- 
tianity began.  They  create  the  temple,  the  symbol,  the 
priest,  the  ritual,  the  choir,  in  a  word,  all  the  functions 
and  the  paraphernalia  of  the  cultus ;  and  there  they 
stop.    Bevond  that,  thev  have  no  i^rowth,  and  no  power 


Licet.  I.]  THE  SERMON :    ITS  GENERIC  IDEA.  1 1 

of  conversion.  Among  the  masses  of  mankind  thej 
do  not  arouse  intelligent  thinking. enough  to  create  the 
material  on  any  broad  scale  for  a  preacher  to  worl? 
upon.  They  do  not  create  the  desire  to  be  taught,  rea- 
soned with,  persuaded,  preached  to,  on  religious  themes. 
They  do  but  imitate  Christianity,  when  they  employ? 
preachers  for  their  propagation.  Gibbon  speaks  of  the 
pulpit  of  the  caliphs.  Omar  is  represented  as  a  preach- 
er; but  that  conception  of  Mohammedan  oratory  was 
borrowed  from  the  Christian  vocabulary.  The  oral  ad- 
dresses of  the  caliphs  were  military  harangues,  nothing 
more.  Alexander  and  Napoleon  on  the  eve  of  battle 
were  as  truly  preachers  as  Omar ;  and  their  aim  of  dis- 
course was  as  really  a  religious  aim  as  his.  Only  by  a 
figure  of  speech,  and  a  delusive  one,  can  Mohammedan 
discourse  be  termed  "  preaching.  "  Of  all  human  sys- 
tems of  thought  which  have  made  nations  in  history, 
Mohainmedanism^ontains  the  least  material  for  preach- 
ing. It  has  no  subjects  for  the  pulpit.  The  system  is 
fatalism  pure  and  simple,  the  most  brazen  assault  upoD 
the  common  sense  of  mankind  which  stands  recorded  in 
history.  It  can  not  be  consistently  urged  upon  the  con- 
victions or  the  sensibilities  of  men  by  oratorical  persua- 
sion. The  Mohammedan  is  not  a  proper  subject  of 
persuasion.  He  is  not  a  reasoning  being.  Fate  drives 
him  in  grooves.  Hence  the  argument  of  Mohamme- 
danism is  the  sword.  Preaching,  therefore,  I  repeat,  is 
both  theoretically  and  historically  Christian.  It  owes 
its  existence  to  the  Christian  Scriptures ;  and  nr)thing 
but  the  spirit  of  biblical  religion  keeps  it  alive. 

This  view  of  the  relation  of  the  pulpit  to  the  Bible 
is  confirmed  by  the  fact  that  retrograde  tendencies  of 
the  Christian  Church  from  its  primeval  purity  aro 
always  tendencies  to  the  disuse  of  preaching.     A  slid- 


w 


12  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  Tlbct.  t 

ing  scale  might  be  constructed,  by  which  one  might 
gauge  the  degree  of_corruption  in  the  Church  cf  the 
middle  ages  by  the  progressive  decline  of  the  pulpit. 
No  matter  whether  the  Church  succumbed  to  Paganism 
or  to  philosophy,  the  result  was  the  same :  the  pulpit 
succumbed  proportionately.  While  the  symbols  of 
Christian  worship  multiplied  in  number,  and  increased 
in  splendor,  the  symbol  of  Christian  thinking  and  per- 
suasion sunk  into  imbecility.  When  the  Church  lost 
its  faith  in  the  Bible  as  the  only  inspired  source  of 
knowledge,  then  sacerdotalism  took  the  place  of  religious 
teaching,  and  the  priesthood  became  too  ignorant  or  too 
indolent,  or  both,  to  be  preachers.  Christianity  became 
only  a  religion  of  the  altar,  a  eultus,  just  as  Pagar.ism 
had  been  before  it.  There  is  no  evidence  from  the  his- 
tory of  Christianity,  that  worship,  however  spiritual  and 
intelligent  at  the  outset,  can  keep  itself  pure  by  the 
working  of  its  own  elements.  The  preservative  from 
putrefaction,  the  disinfectant  of  moral  disease,  so  far  as 
human  instrumentality  is  concerned,  is  the  preaching 
element. 

Reformatory  struggles  in  the  Church  point  to  the  same 
truth.  They  have  always  been  aimed  at  two  things 
which  they  have  kept  nearly  abreast  with  each  other , 
One  is  the  restoration  of  an  uncorrupted  and  unfettered 
Bible ;  the  other,  the  revival  of  the  pulpit.  The  early 
Waldensian  movement  in  Italy,  that  of  Huss  in  Bohe- 
mia, that  of  Wickliffe  in  England,  the  Reformation  of 
the  sixteenth  century,  we  have  only  to  name  these, 
to  recall  the  two  great  instrumentalities  whi:h  the/ 
exalted,  —  a  free  Bible  and  a  free  pulpit.  The  coLflict 
of  the  Puritans  with  Queen  Elizabeth  was  waged 
chiefly  around  the  same  two  foci  of  the  religious  thought 
of  England,  —  the  Bible  in  the  homes,  and  a  free  pulpit 


hKcr.  I.]  THE  SERMON :  ITS  GENERIC  IDEA.  13 

in  the  sanctuaries  of  the  people.  The  Puritans  con- 
tended for  liberty  to  preach  the  word  of  God,  and  for 
multiplying  the  number  of  priests  who  could  preach  it. 
The  papal  party  in  the  English  Church  decried  both, 
and  denied  the  necessity  of  either.  The  recovery  of 
the  biblical  spirit  to  the  piety  of  England  was  due  to 
the  Puritan  prophecyings. 

Does  not  history  perpetually  repeat  itself,  in  this 
respect,  in  our  own  day  ?  Revivals  of  religion  go  hand 
hi  hand  with  a  deepened  reverence  for  the  Scriptures, 
and  a  multiplied  use  of  the  pulpit.  A  dying  or  a  dead 
Church  thrives,  if  at  all,  externally  on  its  form  of 
worship.  Of  evangelical  denominations,  those  which 
exalt  the  pulpit  above  worship  have  the  most  vital  sym- 
pathy with  religious  awakening  among  the  people.  The 
genius  of  revivals  is  germane  to  them.  Those  which 
exalt  worship  above  preaching  only  tolerate  such  awak- 
enings, as  they  feel  the  distant  refluence  of  them  from 
surrounding  sects.  In  brief,  the  more  exclusive  the 
popular  reverence  is  for  the  Bible  as  the  only  sacred 
book  unrivaled  by  books  of  prayer,  and  catechisms, 
and  confessions  of  faith,  and  the  more  intense  the 
spirituality  of  the  popular  interpretation  of  the  Bible 
unperverted  by  the  love  of  forms,  so  much  the  more 
exalted  is  the  respect  of  the  people  for  the  pulpit,  and 
80  much  the  more  vital  is  preaching  to  their  religious 
faith.  Such  is  the  law  of  religious  life  as  evolved  from 
the  history  of  the  Church.  Account  for  it  as  we  may, 
s^omehow  the  pulpit  and  the  Bible  go  together.  If  the 
one  sinks,  it  carries  down  the  other :  if  the  one  drops 
out  of  the  popular  faith,  the  other  dies.  Neither  is  . 
ever  resuscitated  alone.  It  is  not,  therefore,  a  narrow  > 
conception  of  a  sermon,  if  we  incorporate  into  its  very 
definition  the  fact  of  its  dependence  on  a  revealed 
religion,  and  that,  the  religion  of  the  Scriptures. 


LECTURE  II. 

THE   SEEMON  :   ITS  GENERIC   IDEA. 

6tkv  Oontinuing  the  discussion  of  the  generic  idea 
of  a  sermon,  we  notice  a  fifth  thesis;  namely,  that  a 
sermon  is  an  oral  address  to  the  popular  mind,  upon 
religious  truth  as  contained  in  the  Scriptures,  and  elab- 
orately  treated,  A  sermon  must  be  distinguished  from 
certain  forms  of  religious  discourse,  from  which  it  does 
not  differ  except  in  point  of  elaboration.  A  religious 
exhortation,  for  instance,  is  not  a  sermon.  A  part  of 
a  sermon  ifc  may  be ;  but  hortation  standing  alone  is 
not  preaching.  Informal  remarks  in  a  meeting  for 
religious  conference  are  not  a  sermon.  Woven  into 
a  sermon  they  may  be;  but  isolated  they  are  not 
preaching.  A  sermon  is  a  structure :  it  is  something 
put  together  with  care.  It  has  unity,  coherence,  propor- 
tion, a  beginning,  a  middle,  and  an  end.  As  a  literary 
production,  it  has  a  philosophical  construction  as  truly 
as  a  tragedy  or  an  epic  poem. 

How  is  this  theory  of  the  essential  elaborateness  of 
a  sermon  to  be  reconciled  with  the  apparent  power  of 
spontaneous  preaching  ?  (  Dr.  James  Alexander  repeats 
the  experience  of  every  pastor,  when  he  expresses  his 
surprise  at  the  failure  of  his  most  costly  efforts  as  com- 
pared with  his  extemporaneous  effusions.  How  is  this 
to  be  reconciled,  can  it  indeed  be  reconciled,  with  the 

14 


LDCT.  n.]         THE  SERMON  ;   ITS  GENERIC  IDEA.  15 

theory  here  advanced  of  the  necessary  elaborateness  of 
ml  pulpit  discourse  ? 

(1)  I  answer,  by  observing  that  the  power  of  sponta- 
neous preaching  is  often  overrated.  Often  it  is  not 
true  that  such  preaching  has  great  relative  power.  We 
are  all  liable  to  a  delusion  in  our  judgment  of  this,  and 
noi.e  more  so  than  the  preacher  himself,  who  has  every 
possible  inducement,  every  temptation  I  may  say,  to 
see  evidences  which  do  not  exist  of  effects  from  such 
preaching.  Some  subtle  infirmities  of  human  nature 
are  gratified  by  the  conviction  that  such  preaching  does 
accomplish  the  work  of  the  pulpit.  The  temptation  it 
presents  is  very  insidious  to  dignify  by  the  name  of 
Christian  simplicity  that  which  is  commonplace  in 
thought,  shallow  in  feeling,  and  ephemeral  in  effect. 
Let  us,  then,  be  honest  with  ourselves,  and  see  this  thing 
as  it  is.  In  the  pulpit,  as  everywhere  else,  the  pre- 
sumption is  always  against  the  efficiency  of  any  thing 
which  costs  the  producer  little.  The  facts  of  life  con- 
firm this  presumption.  Preaching,  which  is  really  the 
fruit  of  a  mind  at  ease,  does  not  end  in  powerful  results. 
Profound  impressions  do  not  come  from  such  sermons. 
Permanent  impressions  do  not.  Impressions  formative 
of  character  do  not.  Impressions  upon  the  strongest 
characters  are  from  no  such  preaching.  I  speak  now 
of  the  law  of  the  pulpit  respecting  this  thing,  not  of 
anomalous  exceptions. 

Much  is  often  said  and  made  of  weeping  in  an  audi' 
Bnce.  We  overrate  this.  Tears  are  not  evidence  of 
the  profoundest  emotions.  They  are  not  more  so  in 
religion  than  in  other  things.  They  are  sometunee 
nothing  but  a  nervous  luxury.  They  are  not  wholly 
beyond  the  stimulus  of  the  will.  A  man  weeps  lesa 
easily  as  his  sensibiHties  deepen  with  time,  and  his  char 


16  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lbot.  n 

acter  sloughs  oS  self-delusions.  Old  age  is  very  apt  to 
be  tearless.  The  dying  almost  never  weep.  In  a  pub- 
lic speaker  tears  are  an  infirmity  to  be  got  rid  of,  never 
a  gift  to  be  vain  of.  Audiences  which  are  habitually 
moved  to  the  weeping  mood  are  not  those  in  which  the 
most  healthful  piety  is  forming  under  the  ministrations 
of  the  pulpit.  Their  religious  experience  is  in  dangei 
of  settling  into  a  routine  of  theatric  sensibility.  I  once 
saw  a  German  audience  weeping  under  an  exclamatory 
sermon  such  as  would  scarcely  be  tolerated  in  an 
American  conference-meeting.  The  greater  part  of  that 
audience,  I  was  informed,  were  present  at  the  theatre 
in  the  evening  of  the  same  day.  It  may  be  reasonably 
doubted  whether  such  would  have  been  the  case,  if  the 
sermon  had  given  them  any  thing  to  think  of,  instead 
of  the  luxury  of  a  few  tears. 

The  criticism  of  men  of  the  world  upon  the  habits 
of  religious  people  is  worth  reading,  if  not  heeding. 
r  A  critic  in  the  "  Saturday  Review  "  thus  discourses : 
"  The  assumption  that  a  ready  command  of  lachrymal 
secretions  is  a  sign  of  virtue  is  very  common  among  a 
large  class  of  people.  .  .  .  They  find  a  sweet  relish  in 
comparing  their  own  sensitiveness  with  the  aridity  of 
other  folk.  .  .  .  This  worship  of  demonstrative  sensi- 
bility is  one  of  the  most  silly  and  mischievous  super- 
stitions of  modern  times.  .  .  .  The  fact  is,  that  the  sort 
of  sensibility  which  is  very  close  upon  crying  is  in 
great  degree  constitutional.  Some  people  are  boni 
with  weaker  nerves  and  softer  susceptibilities  than  otli- 
ers,  as  some  are  born  with  red,  and  some  with  black 
hair.  The  fact  has  no  moral  significance  either  way. 
Hearts  worn  upon  the  sleeve  are  not  the  most  delicate 
and  sensitive."/  Such  is  the  strong  and  rather  stern 
good  sense  which  the  pulpit  must  encounter  among 


LKCT.  n.]         THE  SERMON :   ITS  GENERIC  IDEA.  V 

men  of  the  world.  It  is  not  apt  to  be  very  tolerant  of 
moist  preachers  and  paralytic  audiences. 

(2)  The  genume  power  of  spontaneous  preaching  is 
very  largely  a  reflection  of  the  power  of  elaborate  dis^ 
course.  The  first  owes  its  existence  to  the  second. 
You  will  not  have  been  very  long  in  the  ministry  when 
you  will  discover  the  worth  of  your  own  history  in  the 
pulpit.  That  which  you  say  there  you  will  find  inter- 
preted by  that  which  you  have  said.  That  which  ycu 
do  will  be  received  with  the  weight  of  that  which 
you  have  done.  That  which  you  preach  will  go  to  the 
people  with  the  momentum  of  that  which  you  have 
been  found  to  he.  Your  character  will  energize  your 
words.  This  history  of  every  preacher,  and  of  his 
pulpit,  is  always  to  be  taken  into  the  account  in  judg- 
ing of  the  efficiency  of  single  sermons. 

Apply  this  principle,  for  a  moment,  to  the  sponta- 
neous sermon.  The  effect  of  such  a  sermon  often  indi- 
cates only  that  the  preacher's  present  effort  carries  the 
weight  of  his  history.  One  great  sermon  will  overshadow 
and  protect  many  small  ones.  Still  more  successfully 
will  strong  preaching  as  the  rule  bear  up  weak  preach- 
ing as  the  exception.  The  truth  is,  that  any  great  art, 
to  be  sustained  in  its  weak  points,  must  have  its  strong 
points.  In  all  varieties  of  power  there  is  a  class  of 
petty,  one  may  almost  say  frivolous,  instrumentalities 
which  seem  to  have  more  power  than  they  have,  because 
dI*  this  secret  suction  of  strength  from  richer  re- 
sources. They  can  never  be  wisely  depended  oa,  to 
the  neglect  of  those  richer  resources.  They  can  not 
be  even  what  they  honestly  are,  without  the  cultivation 
of  those  resources.  They  are  scintillations  which  can 
not  have  even  their  momentary  glare,  without  the  solid, 
massive,  heated  globes  from  which  they  emanate.     As 


( 


18  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  a 

there  can  not  be  a  parody  without  a  poem,  so  there 
can  be  no  preaching  impromptu  without  elaborate  ser- 
monizing to  keep  the  pulpit  alive,  and  to  make  preach- 
ing respectable  enough  to  command  a  hearing  for  its 
inferior  effusions. 

(3)  Another  view  of  the  subject  of  spontaneous 
preaching  remains,  which  is  the  most  vital  of  all.  It 
is,  that  apparently  spontaneous  trains  of  thought  are 
often  the  result  of  the  most  severe  elaboration.  Fre- 
quently that  which  seems  to  be  preaching  "  offhand  '* 
is  any  thing  but  that.  It  is  preceded  by  most  labori- 
ous, and,  as  related  to  the  subjects  in  hand,  most  mas- 
terly, mental  processes.  Years  of  culture  are  behind  it. 
It  is  the  ripened  fruit  of  thoughts  which  struggled  into 
the  mind's  life  years  before,  and  which  have  been  mel- 
lowing there  ever  since.    J 

Two  classes  of  these  ripened  materials  are  observable 
in  sermons  of  the  kind  now  in  question.  One  is  that 
of  strong  thought,  which  has  los^  its  appearance  of 
elaboration  through  the  long  familiarity  of  the  preach- 
er's mind  with  it.  He,  has  revolved  it,  and  dissected  it, 
and  pursued  it  into  lateral  relations,  and  experimented 
with  the  uses  of  it,  till  he  knows  it  all  around  and  all 
through.  The  choice  aspects  of  it  he  recalls  on  the 
instant.  The  lights  and  shadows  of  it  are  all  pictured 
in  his  mind's  eye.  Fragments  and  connections  cf  it 
which  are  useless  for  popular  impression  he  knows,  and 
therefore  he  knows  when  to  let  them  alone.  His  per- 
ception of  it  now  has  the  quickness  of  in?tuition ;  but 
was  it  intuition  at  the  first  ?  His  use  of  it  now  has  the 
spontaneity  of  genius;  but  was  it  genius  originally? 
His  preaching  of  it  now  has  the  facility  of  nature. 
There  seems  to  be  no  science,  no  art,  no  study,  no  toil, 
about  it.     The  truth  seems  just  to  flow  to  him  and 


LKCT.  n.]         THE  SERMON :    ITS  GENERIC  IDEA.  19 

through  him  by  natural  inspiration.  Verily  he  ha8 
"  opened  his  mouth  and  taught  them,  saying."  But 
was  he  always  inspired  thus?  Not  at  all.  He  has 
reached  his  present  mental  possession  of  that  truth 
by  some^of  iJie  most  elaborate  mental  processes  of  his 
life;  but  the  elaboration  is  out  of  sight,  perhaps  for- 
gotten by  the  preacher  himself.  The  delving  and  the 
boring  and  the  blasting  are  finished  ;  and  now  the.  fouu- 
taiii  gushes  out,  the  freest  and  easiest  and  freshest 
thing  in  nature,  just  because  the  vein  has  been  struck, 
It  is  only  a  play  upon  words  to  exalt  such  preaching  a? 
opposed  to  or  different  from  elaborated  sermons. 

But  often  there  is  another  element  in  such  preaching, 
more  valuable  than  any  intellectual  fruitage,  yet  indic- 
ative of  elaboration  of  the  severest  and  profoundest 
quality.  It  is  that  of  thought  which  has  grown  rich  in  / 
the  mind  of  the  preacher^  through  his  own  long  experi-  ]/ 
ence  of  it  in  his  own  character.  No  other  elements  of 
truth  are  so  thoroughly  at  a  man's  command  as  elem^ts 
like  these.  If  he  is  a  true  man,  he  is  living  them  every 
hour.  The  preaching  of  such  truths  is  the  nearest 
approach  one  can  make  to  the  discourses  of  Christ. 
No  wonder  that  it  is  has  power.  But  is  there  no  elabo- 
ration lying  back  of  such  power?  The  most  intense 
and  the  most  intricate  elaboration  of  truth  is  involved 
in  those  mental  processes  by  which  character  is  formed 
and  consolidated.  As  no  other  product  of  thought 
equals  character,  so  no  other  discipline  is  so  severe  or 
80  complicated,  so  ingenious  or  so  artful,  as  the  hidden 
disqipliue  by  which  character  matures.  No  matter 
wliether  the  preacher  has  derived  his  experience  of  the 
truth  from  the  stimulus  of  books  or  not,  the  essential 
point  is  that  his  mind  has  gone  through  the  process  of 
revolutionary  struggle  in  coming  to  its  present  com- 


20  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  n 

mand  of  the  truth  he  preaches.  He  is  but  a  half- 
formed  man,  if  he  has  not  discovered  this,  and  if  he 
therefore  decries  elaborate  sermons  as  sometliing  unlike 
his  own.     If  his  is  not  elaborate  preaching,  there  is  no 

,  such  preaching. 

<^  You  can  all  easily  test  the  truth  of  the  views  here 

7  advanced,  by  your  own  experience,  real  or  probable. 

^^^guppose  that  you  were  driven  in  an  emergency  to 
preach  without  present  preparation.  You  are  on  a 
journey.  On  the  Sabbath  morning  you  are  placed  in 
circumstances  in  wliich  you  must  preach,  or  be  cow- 
ardly, through  fear  for  your  reputation.  You  have  no 
^  written  sermon  which  is  accessible:  you  must  preach 

extemporaneously.  You  have  only  the  time  in  which 
the  devotional  services  are  in  progress  to  cast  your 
thoughts  into  order,  and  choose  a  text.  What  sort  of 
a  text  will  you  certainly  choose  in  such  an  exigency  ? 
what  kind  of  subject?  what  train  of  thought?  Will 
they  be  text,  theme,  thoughts,  wholly  novel  to  you, 
unexplored,  untried,  undigested  ?  or  will  they  be  mate- 
rials which  are  familiar  to  you?  Most  surely,  if  you 
are  a  man  of  sense,  they  will  be  the  latter.  You  will 
.nstinctively  select  a  channel  in  which  your  mind  has 
been  used  to  flowing,  and  in  which,  therefore,  it  flows 
easily  and  naturally.  You  will,  in  other  words,  choose 
a  theme  on  which  your  mind  has  a  history,  an  experi- 
ence either  of  intellect  or  of  heart,  or  of  both ;  and  that 
history,  if  it  is  worth  any  thing  to  anybody,  has  cost 
you  something.  You  have  toiled  for  it ;  you  have  strug- 
gled for  it;  you  have  given  time  to  it;  you  have  suf- 
fered mental  failures  about  it :  in  short,  you  have  elab- 
orated it.  When,  therefore,  at  the  close  of  the  service, 
you  see  evidence  that  good  has  been  done  by  jour 
preaching,  perhaps  a  soul  awakened  or  converted,  do 


1.KCT.  II.]        THE  SERMON :    QS  GENERIC  D>EA.  21 

not  set  it  down  to  the  credit  of  simple  preacliing  as 
opposed  to  intellectual  preacliing.  Do  not  be  beguiled 
into  a  lazy  ministry.  Rest  assured  that  such  preaching 
is  truly  useful  just  in  proportion  to  its  cost  in  previous 
labor.  Up  to  the  extreme  border  of  your  own  hard- 
bought  experience,  you  can  preach  thus  with  power, 
beyond  that  border,  such  preaching  is  the  weakest  of 
all  possible  dilutions.  When  it  ceases  to  be  an  experi- 
ence, and  becomes  an  imitation,  it  wins  no  hearts,  be- 
cause it  commands  no  respect.  The  pulpit  which  then 
depends  upon  it  for  results  dies  out,  and  no  man 
mourns.  For  the  reasons  thus  given,  we  insert  into  the 
very  definition  of  a  sermon,  as  belonging  to  the  generic 
idea  of  the  thing,  that  it  must  be  a  structure,  and  there- 
fore the  fruit  of  elaboration. 

6th,  A  sermon  is  an  oral  address  to  the  populai 
mind,  upon  religious  truth  contained  in  the  Scriptures, 
and  elaborately  treated  with  a  view  to  persuasion.  This 
assigns  the  sermon  to  the  loftiest  form  of  rhetorical 
discourse.  It  distinguishes  preaching,  also,  from  two 
species  of  composition  from  which  it  is  not  otherwise 
entirely  distinct. 

(1)  One  of  these  is  poetry.  Poetry  and  preaching 
may  have  numerous  resemblances.  Both  may  be  orally 
delivered.  Homer  chanted  the  Iliad.  The  poetic  drama 
is  constructed  primarily  with  reference  to  oral  utter- 
ance. Both  may  be  addressed  to  the  popular  mind.  The 
ballads  of  all  literatures  are  thus  addressed.  Italian 
improvisators  address  their  poetic  effusions  to  the  popu- 
lace. Both  may  be  upon  religious  themes,  tTpon  biblical 
themes,  upon  themes  elaborately  treated.  For  all  these 
qualities,  Milton  hoped  for  the  "Paradise  Lost"  an 
undying  fame.  Madame  de  Stael,  in  "  Corinne,"  repre- 
sents  some   of  the  ephemeral   productions  of  the  im* 


'"1  l^   I 


2ii  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  u 

provisators  as  finished  specimens  of  literature.  A  poem, 
then,  may  possess  every  feature  which  has  been  remarked 
as  essential  to  homiletic  discourse,  except  one.  Poetiy 
and  preaching  differ  in  the  conscious  aim  of  the  speaker. 
All  forms  of  poetry  differ  from  all  forms  of  oratory  in 
the  fact  that  a  preacher  always  consciously  aims  at  the 
persuasion  of  the  hearer,  while  a  poet  never  does  so. 
The  esse  atial  idea  of  poetry  is  a  vexed  theme  of  literary 
criticism.  After  all  that  has  been  said  and  written 
upon  it,  I  find  the  essential  idea  of  poetry  in  the  spon- 
taneity of  its  utterance  of  truth  in  rhythmic  forms. 
Popular  criticism  very  nearly  hits  this  principle,  when 
it  speaks  of  poetical  productions  as  pnp.tip.ij  p.ffnsi 
Poetry  floats  in  an  element  of  emotion.  iTflows  unbid- 
den :  it  comes  into  life  in  speech  because  it  must  come. 
Being  the  expression  of  a  soul  so  full  of  its  thought 
that  it  utters  the  thought  for  its  own  sake,  poetry  rep- 
resents no  consciousness  of  design  to  move  the  will  of 
reader  or  hearer.  Hence  in  the  ancient  criticism  the 
poet  was  the  creator :  he  wrought  only  for  self-expres- 
sion. Something  of  the  unconsciousness  of  inspired 
seers  clings  to  all  the  ideas  which  the  ancient  critics 
had  of  the  genius  of  poetry. 

To  this  view  it  may  be  plausiblv  objected,  "What 
of  certain  popular  ballads  which  have  moved  masses  of 
men  to  a  purpose  ?  What  of  revolutionary  ballads  like 
the  Marseillaise  Hymn  ?  What  of  certain  battle-songs 
like  that  of  Gustavus  Adolphus?"  These  have  so 
thiilled  and  moved  to  action  armies  and  nations,  that 
they  rank  among  the  most  persuasive  powers  in  litera- 
ture :  is  there,  then,  no  persuasive  aim  in  their  construc- 
tion? I  answer,  none,  so  far  as  the  consciousness  of 
the  poet  isconcerned  in  the  act  of"  ioniposmg!  The  re- 
corded experience  oi  poets  confirms  this  theoiy.     Such 


i.B^T.  11.]         THE  SERMON :    ITS  GENERIC  IDEA.  23 

productions  never  come  into  life  by  conscious  design : 
they  always  burst  upon  the  world  as  a  surprise, — as 
much  a  surprise  to  their  authors  as  to  any  one  else. 
No  man  ever  creates  such  a  hymn  who  sets  about  it 
with  conscious  aim.  This  theory  is  confirmed  by  the 
history  of  the  best  specimens  of  religious  hymnology, 
The  choicest  hymns  of  all  languages,  which  have  lifted 
the  Christian  Church  to  heaven  in  the  service  of  song, 
have  not  been  created  with  any  such  conscious  design. 
Their  moving  of  the  world  was  in  the  divine  purpose, 
not  in  the  human  purpose,  of  their  construction.  They 
all  breathe  an  atmosphere  of  solitude.  Intense  indi- 
vidualism in  communion  with  God  characterizes  them. 
*'  Ml/  faith  looks  up  to  Thee  "  is  the  keynote  of  their 
production.  Listening  and  sympathizing  and  partici- 
pating and  obedient  audiences  are  as  much  out  of  mind 
as  out  of  sight,  when  such  immortal  hymns  come  to 
their  birth.  Only  the  Spirit  of  God  then  moves  upon 
the  face  of  the  waters. 

On  th^  other  hand,  the  least  impressive  fragments  of 
all  our  hymnological  literature  are  the  expostulatory 
and  comminatory  hymns.  They  are  not  poetry :  they 
are  only  preaching  in  meter.  A  perfect  taste  rejects 
them.  In  the  nature  of  things,  an  exhortation  to 
repentance Js  not  meant  to  be  sung.  A  multitude  of 
our  religious  melodies,  popular  in  revivals  of  religi(^n, 
come  under  this  condemnation.  A  perfected  spiritual 
taste,  and  a  perfected  aesthetic  taste  as  well,  eschew 
them.  The  time  is  coming  when  our  hymn-books  for 
use  in  the  public  service  of  song  will  be  expurgated  of 
every  thing  which  is  not  a  spontaneous  outflow  of  some 
form  of  communion  with  God.  A  hymn-book  limited 
to  the  loftiest  songs  of  worship  would  be  as  perfect  in 
poetic   quality   as   in   spiritual    experience.      In    both 


24  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  n 

respects  it  would  be  a  reproduction  of  the  Psalms  oi 
the  Old  Testament,  in  which  but  one  solitary  instance 
occurs  of  expostulatory  threatening.  Since  these  pages 
were  written,  I  have  been  confirmed  in  the  views  they 
advance  of  the  nature  of  true  poetry  by  discovering  an 
expression  by  Goethe  on  the  same  subject.  He  says, 
"  Poetry  is  the  spontaneous  effluence  of  a  soul  absorbed 
in  its  own  inspirations." 

What,  now,  is  the  distinctive  feature  of  oratory  as 
compared  with  poetry  ?  It  is  the  ascendency  over  every 
thing  else  of  that  which  does  not  exist  at  all  in  poetry ; 
namely,  the  conscious  aim  at  persuasion.  In  poetry, 
the  audience  is  nothing:  in  oratory,  the  audience  ie 
every  thing.  In  poetry,  therefore,  persuasion  finds  no 
place :  in  oratory,  it  commands  every  place.  Preach 
ing,  therefore,  excludes  every  thing  which  is  not  either 
persuasion,  or  a  tributary  to  persuasion.  In  the  con- 
sciousness of  the  preacher  in  the  act  of  preaching,  and  in 
the  consciousness  of  the  hearer  in  the  act  of  listening, 
this  aim  at  persuasion  is  everywhere  and  always  felt. 
Nothing  is  preaching  of  which  this  is  not  true  :  nothing 
is  eloquence  of  which  this  is  not  true.  Eloquence  is 
always  an  aim  at  a  mark,  never  a  solitary  self-expres- 
sion. As  Daniel  Webster  defined  it,  it  is  "  always  a 
progress  on,  right  on,  to  an  object."  That  object  in  the 
end  is  always  the  same,  —  persuasion.  In  true  preach- 
ing, therefore,  argument  is  never  used  for  the  sake  of 
the  fipgument;  illustration,  never  for  the  sake  of  the 
illustration ;  ornament,  never  for  the  sake  of  the  orna- 
ment. These  are  always  means  to  an  end,  and  the  end 
is  persuasion.  The  more  elaborate  they  are,  if  true  to 
their  purpose,  the  more  faithfully  tributary  they  are  to 
the  one  end,  and  the  more  powerful  is  the  impetus  they 
give  to  the  movement  of  discourse  towards  that  end. 


LBOT.  II.]         THE  SERMON :    ITS  GENERIC  IDEA  25 

The  broader  the  sweep  of  the  circle,  the  more  irresis- 
tible is  the  momentum  of  the  descent,  and  the  more 
concentrated  the  unity  of  the  blow  struck. 

(2)  The  second  of  the  two  species  of  composition 
from  which  the  present  thesis  distinguishes  preaching 
is  that  species  of  prose  composition  in  which  the  only 
object  is  either  intellectual  or  emotive.  Some  compo- 
sitions there  are  which  combine  every  requisite  of  a 
sermon  except  this,  of  aim  at  the  will  of  a  hearer 
Some  discourses  in  the  pulpit  are  purely  instructive  in 
their  aims ;  knowledge  is  communicated  for  the  sake  of 
the  knowledge,  and  nothing  more.  Others  are  purely 
imaginative :  feeling  is  wrought  upon  by  imaginative 
art,  for  the  luxury  of  the  feeling,  and  nothing  more. 
The  question  arises,  then,  Are  these  productions  ser- 
mons? The  answer,  strictly  speaking,  must  be  in  the 
negative.  The  immediate  object  of  a  sermon  may  be 
instruction,  or  the  excitement  of  emotion,  or  both ;  but 
the  ultimate  object  is  neither.  True  eloquence,  and 
therefore  true  preaching,  always  foreshadow  the  per- 
suasion of  the  hearer  as  their  final  aim.  They  may 
not  disclose  the  thing  to  which  he  is  to  be  persuaded ; 
but  they  must  disclose  the  fact  of  something  to  which 
he  is  to  be  persuaded.  In  a  series  of  sermons,  for 
instance,  the  applicatory  persuasion  may  lie  at  the  end 
of  the  series ;  but  its  beginning  and  middle  will  breathe 
the  spirit  of  the  coming  persuasive  process.  That  is 
liviug  in  the  consciousness  of  the  preacher,  and  the 
irhole  line  of  the  discussion  will  vibrate  with  it.  The 
discussion  exists  for  it  and  for  nothing  else. 

Herein  lies  the  vital  distinction  between  the  pulpit 
and  the  stage.  Theatric  discourse,  in  its  purest  and 
most  lofty  purpose,  stops  short  of  the  persuading  of  a 
hearer.     It  may  amuse,  it  may  instruct,  it  may  rouse 


%  -».,-*# 


.^\ 


*J^*-iii^      >^ 


[ 


2G  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [leot.  il 

emotion,  it  may  play  indefinitely  back  and  forth 
between  intellect  and  sensibility ;  but  it  does  not  per- 
suade. It  is  busy  with  the  intellectual  faculties,  it 
plays  with  the  sensibilities;  it  riots  among  the  pas- 
sions; but  there  it  ends.  It  does  not  move  upon  the 
will  as  the  grand  point  to  be  carried  by  dramatic 
appeal.  Just  here  the  pulpit  and  stage  are  at  antipodes 
to  each  other.  On  the  stage,  the  will  of  the  hearei  is 
nothing ;  the  intellect  and  sensibilities  every  thing.  In 
the  pulpit,  the  will  is  every  thing;  the  intellect  and 
sensibilities  nothing  but  tributaries. 

Yet  this  distinction  condemns  certain  varieties  of 
discourse  which  are  often  heard  in  pulpits.  Some  dis- 
courses are  essentially  theatric  in  their  aim.  They 
instruct,  and  that  only;  they  sport  with  the  imagina- 
tir^n,  and  that  only ;  they  play  with  the  feelings,  and 
that  only.  Specially  in  certain  forms  of  argumentative 
discourse  is  the  theatric  quality  obvious.  It  marks  the 
chief  distinction  between  two  classes  of  argumentative 
preachers.  One  preacher  discourses  as  if  he  felt,  and 
he  makes  his  audience  feel,  that  his  argument  is  the  all 
in  all.  He  argues  for  the  sake  of  the  intellectual  treat ; 
he  communicates  the  knowledge  for  the  sake  of  the 
knowledge ;  he  tasks  the  intellect  for  the  sake  of  the 
strain  ;  and  that  is  the  whole  of  it.  The  being  of  God, 
and  the  necessity  of  an  Atonement,  he  proves  as  Agas- 
siz  would  have  lectured  on  an  Amazonian  fish  or  the 
glacial  theory.  Another  preacher  will  appear  to  feel, 
and  will  make  his  audience  feel,  that  his  argument  is  a 
preliminary ;  his  use  of  the  intellect  is  an  instrument ; 
the  whole  argumentative  process  is  a  means  to  an  end ; 
and  the  whole  discourse  is  alive  and  tremulous  with  the 
consciousness  of  that  end.  He  proves  an  Atonement  as 
he  would  build  a  raft,  or  man  a  Ufe-boat,  for  drowning 


LECT.  i:.]         THE  SERMON :    ITS  GENERIC  IDEA.  27 

men.  This  eager  on-looMng  to  the  end  in  all  the  Intel- 
f  ectual  processes  of  the  pulpit  is  to  preaching  what  the 
circulation  of  the  blood  is  to  the  vital  powers  of  the 
body.  If  it  languishes,  life  languishes :  when  it  ceases, 
life  goes  out.  Therefore  the  persuasive  aim  enters  into 
kbe  very  definition  of  a  a^rmoii. 


) 


LECTURE  III. 

THE  8EEM0N:   CLASSIFICATION,   ANALYSIS. 

II.  The  generic  idea  of  a  sermon,  then,  is  that  of 
an  oral  address  to  the  popular  mind,  on  religious  truth 
contained  in  the  Scriptures,  and  elaborately  treated 
with  a  view  to  persuasion.  Proceeding  with  this  ge- 
neric idea  of  preaching,  we  are  prepared  to  consider 
sermons  more  specifically  as  subject  to  certain  varieties 
of  classification. 

1st,  Homiletic  classification  is  founded,  either  in 
practice  or  in  theory,  upon  seven^  different  principles. 
They  are  the  following. 

(1)  One  is  the  mode  of  delivery.  On  this  princi- 
ple, we  recognize,  in  practice,  sermons  as  delivered  from 
manuscript,  from  memory,  and  extemporaneously.  This, 
obviously,  is  not,^a>^hetorical  classification.  The  same 
principles  of  rhetoric  apply  to  an  extemporaneous  as  to 
a  written  discourse,  if  both  are  orally  delivered.  Rela- 
tively this  is  not  an  important  classification.  No  vital 
principles  of  discourse  are  concerned  with  it :  still,  in 
{■ractice,  it  is  a  convenient  classification. 

(2)  A  second  classification  is  founded  upon  the  oc- 
casions on  which  sermons  are  delivered.  This,  again,  is 
a  superficial  arrangement  of  discourses:  relatively  it 
is  unimportant ;  strictly  it  is  not  rhetorical.  Still  it  is 
often  a  practical  convenience  to  classify  by  occasion. 


i.rfCT.  m.]  THE  SERMON:    CLASSIFICATION.  29 

We  therefore  speak  of  "ordinary"  and  "occasional" 
sermons;  and  occasional  sermons  we  subdivide  indefi- 
nitely. 

(3)  A  third  classification  is  founded  upon  tl)jB,  sub 
jects  of  sermons.  Schott  classifies  sermons  mainly  by 
subject.  He  terms  them  "  doctrinal,"  "  practical,"  "  his- 
torical," and  "  philosophical."  But  the  distinction  be- 
tween "doctrinal"  and  "practical,"  as  applied  to  ser- 
mons, is  mischievous.  Schott  is  apparently  sensible  of 
this;  and  he  therefore  tones  down  the  distinction  bj 
terming  the  one  class  "  doctrino-practical,"  and  the 
other  class  "  practico-doctrinal."  This  is  keen  analysis, 
and  very  necessary  in  practice,  if  the  primary  distinc- 
tion is  retained.  It  hints  at  the  relative  proportion  of 
doctrinal  discussion  to  practical  application  in  the  twD 
classes  of  sermons. 

Again:  classification  by  subject  is  noLarhetorical 
method.  As  a  rhetorical  structure,  a  sermon  is  inde- 
pendent of  subject ;  that  is,  its  rhetorical  peculiarities 
do  not  depend  on  its  subject.  Still  it  must  be  conceded 
that  classification  by  subject  is  a  practical  convenience 
Preachers  do  and  will  arrange  subjects,  rather  than 
discourses.  Thi?.  may  often  take  the  place  of  more 
philosophical  arrangements.  It  is  impossible  to  reduce 
to  a  brief  series  all  the  themes  of  sermons;  but,  on 
this  principle  of  division,  the  most  important  classes 
consist  of  sermons  upon  doctrines,  upon  duties,  upon 
persons,  upon  events,  and  upon  institutions. 

(4)  A  fourth  classification  is  founded  upon  the  char 
aoter  of  the  audience  addressed.  This  is  n^at-ihetori 
cally  significant  of  the  differences  of  sermons.  What 
matters  it  to  the  essential  structure  of  a  discourse, 
whether  it  be  an  argument  addressed  to  learned  hear- 
ers, or  an  argument  addressed  to  the  illiterate?    An 


80  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHI^a.  [lkct.  ni. 

argument  is  an  argument;  and  this  fact  is  the  thing 
which  determines  its  rhetorical  character;-"  Still  the 
distribution  of  sermons  by  reference  to  the  audience 
addressed  is  a  practical  convenience.  Pastors  often 
designate  their  discourses,  and  arrange  the  proportiona 
of  their  preaching,  by  the  questions :  "  Is  this  a  sermon 
to  (Christians  ?  to  the  unconverted  ?  to  parents  ?  to  chil- 
di'en  ?  to  young  men  ?  to  the  aged  ?  to  the  afflicted  ?  to 
merchants?  to  clergymen?  to  Sabbath  schools?"  and 
so  on  indefinitely.  Valueless  as  this  method  is  for  the 
purposes  of  rhetorical  science,  it  has  a  large  place  in 
the  habits  of  pastors. 

(5)  A  fifth  classification  suggested  by  Dr.  Campbell 
is  founded  upon  the  different  faculties  oFmind  to  which 
sermons  are  supposed  to  be  addressed.  Dr.  Campbell 
thus  distributes  the  discourses  of  the  pulpit  into  those 
addressed  to  the  understanding,  those  addressed  to 
U  ^tke  imagination,  those  addressed  to  the  passions,  and 
i.^Mmose   addressed   to^the   will.     The   ingenuity  of  this 


o-^ 


W^ 


^ 


arrangement  is  unique.  It  would  appear  to  be  a  neat, 
complete,  philosophical  distribution  of  all  possible  dis- 
courses. Yet  it  is  remarkable  for  its  unpractical  char- 
acter. We  may  safely  believe  that  no  man  ever  used 
it  in  adjusting  the  proportions  of  his  preaching. 
Neither  is  there  any  rhetorical  principle  in  this  method 
of  classification.  Rhetoric  does  not  go  out  of  the  di^ 
course  itself  to  find  the  principle  by  which  to  classify 
it.  It  analyzes  the  thing  heard,  not  the  hearer,  to 
discover  what  that  thing  is. 

(6)  A  certain  anomalous  classification,  which  is  a 
peculiarity  of  homiletics,  is  founded  on  the  use  made  of 
the  texts  of  sermons.  I  term  it  an  anomaly  because 
general  rhetoric  does  not  recognize  it.  Oral  discourse 
as  such  need  not  have  a  text.     Outside  of  the  pulpit 


LmcT.  in.]  THE  SERMON:    CLASSIFICATION.  31 

it  commonly  has  none.     Yet  in  the  pulpit  t^e  text  is 
a  necessity,  and  the  classification  of  sermons  upon  the 
use  made  of  the  text  is  convenient  and  of  great  value. 
Though  an  anomaly  in  rhetoric,  we  may  accept  it  as 
homiletic.     The  anomaly  grows  out  of  the  necessities       I 
of  the  pulpit.     On  this  principle,  sermons  may  be  ar-      / 
ranged  in  four  classes,  —  the  topical,  the  textuah  the     A  V 
expository,  and  the  inferential.     The  topicaL  sermon  is  S jC^ 
one  in  which  a  subject  is  deduced  from  the  text,  bat  Cr      jt^ 
discussed  independently  of  the  text.     The  texty^l  ser-/ 
men  is  one  in  which  the  text  is  the  theme,  and  the  parts 
of  the  text  are  the  divisions  of  the  discourse,  and  are 
used  as  a  line  of  suggestion.     An  expository  sermon  is 
one  in  which  the  text  is  the  theme,  and  the  discussion 
is  an  explanation  of  the  text.     The  inferential  sermon 
is  one  in  which  the  text  is  the  theme,  and  the  discus- 
sion is  a  series  of  inferences  directly  from  the  text :   the 
text  is  the  premise,  a  series  of  inferences  is  the  con- 
clusion. 

As  these  distinctions  are  of  great  practical  value  in 
the  labors  of  the  pulpit,  let  me  illustrate  these  four 
classes  of  sermons  by  examples  in  which  the  same  text 
shall  be  employed  in  the  four  methods  here  indicated. 
The  text  is  Phil.  ii.  12,  13.  "  Work  out  your  own  sal- 
vation with  fear  and  trembling;  for  it  is  God  which 
wcrketh  in  you  both  to  will  and  to  do  of  liis  good  pleas- 
ure." From  this  text  we  may  deduce  the  subject  of  tbtj  ^  ^ 
"  Sovereignty  of  God  in  the  Work  of  Salvation,''  or  the  / 
subject  of  the  "  Activity  of  Man  in  Regeneration,"  oi 
the  "  Duty  of  Earnestness  in  seeking  Salvation."  Either 
of  these  themes  might  then  be  discussed  independently 
of  any  further  use  of  the  text,  and  we  should  thus  have 
a  topical  sermon. 

But  we  might  make  the  text  itself  the  theme  of  dis* 


/ 


[E  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect    ul 


f) 


82 

course,  and  might  follow  its  line  of  thought  by  remark- 
ing: 1.  The  duty  enjoined  in  the  text,  "Work  out 
salvation ; "  2.  The  individual  responsibility  for  the 
soul's  salvation  implied  in  the  text,  "Work  out  your 
own  salvation ; "  3.  The  spirit  with  which  salvation 
should  be  sought,  "  With  fear  and  trembling ;  "  4.  The 
dependence  of  effort  to  be  saved  upon  the  power  of 
God,  "  It  is  God  which  worketh  in  you ; "  5.  Depend- 
ence upon  God  for  salvation  is  the  great  encouragement 
to  ef&)rt  for  salvation,  "Work,  for  it  is  God  which 
w^orketh  in  you."  This  train  of  thought  developed 
vvould  constitute  a  textual  sermon. 
dyj  Yet  again  we  might  make  the  text  the  theme,  and 
et  the  sermon  consist  of  an  explanation  of  the  text,  by 
inquiring:  1.  In  what  sense  is  a  sinner  commanded 
to  achieve  his  own  salvation  ?  2.  What  is  the  spirit  of 
fear  and  trembling  in  the  work  of  salvation?  3.  In 
what  sense  does  the  text  affirm  God  to  be  the  author 
of  salvation  ?  4.  What  connection  does  the  text  affirm 
between  the  earnestness  of  the  sinner  and  the  agency 
of  God  ?  An  answer  to  these  inquiries,  devoted  to  the 
language  of  the  text,  and  designed  to  evolve  the  force 
of  the  text,  would  constitute  an  expository  sermon. 

ll^  V^     Once  more  :  we  might  consider  the  text  as  the  theme, 

.^  land  assume,  that,  as  a  well-known  passage,  it  does  not 

J^'*         need   much   explanation.     Explain   it   briefly,   if    you 

V  please,  give  in  a  paraphrase  the  result  without  the  pro- 

cess of  exposition,  and  then  let  the  body  of  the  sermon 
consist  of  a  series  of  inferences  drawn  directly  from 
the  text.  1.  That  salvation  is  a  pressing  necessity 
to  every  man.  2.  That  every  man  is  responsible  for 
his  own  salvation.  3.  That  every  man  who  is  saved 
does  in  fact  achieve  his  own  salvation.  4.  That  depend« 
87X56  upon  God  is  a  help,  not  a  hindrance,  to  salvation. 


LECT.  m.]  THE  SERMON:    CLASSIFICATION.  33 

5.  The  guilt  of  trifling  with  religious  convictions.  6. 
The  unreasonableness  of  waiting  in  impenitence  for  the 
interposition  of  God.  7.  The  uselessness  of  lukewarm 
exertions  to  secure  salvation.  8.  The  certainty  that 
every  man  who  is  in  earnest  to  be  saved  will  be  saved. 
This  line  of  thought  developed  would  be  an  inferential 
sermon.  Its  characteristic  feature  is  neither  topical,  nor 
textual,  nor  expository  discussion,  but  independent  yet  ^ 
direct  inference  from  the  text. 

(7)  A   seventh   method   of  classifying   sermons   re- 
mains to  be  considered.     It  is  a  classification  founded 
on  the  mode  of-ti^eating^  the  subject  of  djacourse.     This 
method  is  preferable  to  all  others  for  several  reasons,    r     J 
In  the  first  place,  it  is  a  strictly  rhetorical  classification.       / 
It  does  not  go  outside  of  the  discourse  itself  to  find  the 
character  of  the  discourse.     What  is  it  that  chiefly  dis- 
tinguishes one  sermon  from  another  ?     Not  the  subject, 
not  the  occasion,  not  the  audience,  not  the  method  of 
deliver3%  not  the  faculty  of  mind  addressed,  not  the 
use  made  of  tJie  text:  it  is  the  method  of  discussion. 
By  this  we  must  necessarily  characterize  any  discourse       ^ 
as  a  rhetorical  structure.     Moreover,  this  is  a  practically  __/g 
convenient  classification.     The  practical  as  well  as  the     y 
theoretic  differences  of  sermons  arise  chiefly  out  of  di- 
versity cf  method  in  the  treatment  of  subjects.     Nothing 
e'se  creates  so  wide  a  difference,  or  so  many  varieties. 
Again :  this  is  a  comprehensive  classification  :  it  covers 
all   varieties   of    sermons.      No   variety   exists   in   the 
usage  of  the  pulpit,  none  is  conceivable  in  homiletic 
theory,  which  it  does  not  reach.     Furthermore,  it  is  no 
peculiarity  of  homiletics :  it  covers  all  varieties  of  oral 
address.     The  principle  threads  everv  thing  known  as 
public  discourse,  and  does  'ic  naturally,  without  force(3 
connections.     Ask,  respecti  ig  any  kind  of  public  speecU. 


(V. 


X' 


34  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  hi 

what  is  its  method  of  discussion,  and  you  classify  it 
instantly  as  a  rhetorical  structure,  upon  a  principle 
which  combines  philosophical  accuracy  and  practical 
convenience  with  comprehensiveness  of  application. 
Upon  this  principle  of  division,  sermons  may  be  ar- 
ranged in  four  classes,  —  the  explanatory,  the  illustra- 
tive, the  argumentative,  the  persuasive. 

Explanatory  sermons^  as  the  name  indicates,  include 
all  sermons  the  chief  object  of  which  is  explanation. 
It  may  be  an  explanation  of  a  text ;  then  the  discourse 
is  technically  an  expository  sermon.  It  may  be  an  ex- 
planation of  a  doctrine ;  then  it  is  one  kind  of  doctrinal 
sermon.  It  may  be  an  explanation  of  a  duty ;  then  it 
is  one  kind  of  ethical  sermon.  It  may  be  an  explana- 
tion of  a  ceremony ;  then  it  is  one  kind  of  sermon  on  a 
positive  institution.  The  rhetorical  feature  which  char- 
acterizes all  these  discourses  is  the  same,  —  the  process 
of  explaining  what  the  thing  is. 

Illustrative  sermons^  as  the  name  betokens,  comprise 
all  sermons  the  chief  object  of  which  is  to  intensify  the 
vividness  of  truth ;  not  to  originate  the  knowledge  of 
truth,  but  to  realize  conceptions  of  it  already  known ; 
not  to  explain  truth,  though  often  it  is  an  incident  of 
illustrative  discourse  that  it  does  explain ;  not  to  prove 
truth,  though  often  it  is  an  incident  of  illustration  that 
it  does  prove.  The  prime  object  is  to  impart  glow  to 
truth,  to  make  men  feel  the  reality  of  what  they  know 
It  is  literally  to  illustrate^  to  make  truth  lustrous,  and 
therefore  impressive.  This  class  of  sermons  includes, 
you  will  perceive,  descriptive  discourses,  sermons  ima- 
ginative of  biblical  scenes,  historical  and  biographical 
sermons,  also  a  large  class  of  discourses  upon  acknowl- 
edged doctrines,  duties,  virtues,  the  force  of  which  lies 
dormant  in  t^e  popular  faith.     The  range  and  signifi- 


f^.yh  /;r, 


LKCT.  m.]  THE  SERMON:    CLASSIFICATION.  35 

cance  of  such  preaching  in  nominally  Christian  lands 
are  obvious  at  a  glance.  Not  explanation,  not  logic, 
not  hortation,  but  pictorial  imagination  holds  the  place 
of  pre-eminence  in  such  preaching  among  the  conditions 
of  ministerial  success. 

Argumentative  sermons^  as  the  title  signifies,  embrace 
all  sermons  the  chief  object  of  which  is  proof.  They  are 
ftiiaed  primarily  at  the  intellect  of  the  heaier.  They 
propose  either  to  create  conviction  where  none  exists, 
or  to  change  conviction  where  the  false  exists.  The 
prime  element  in  such  a  discourse  is  logic  pure  and 
simple.  The  syllogism  is  the  framework :  belief  is  the 
result  aimed  at.  This  class  comprises,  therefore,  a  large 
proportion  of  so-called  doctrinal  sermons,  also  many 
ethical  sermons. 

Persuasive  sermons  have  an  infelicity  in  their  title. 
It  has  been  affirmed  that  all  preaching  has  persuasion 
for  its  ultimate  object,  even  that  nothing  is  a  sermon 
which  is  not  aimed  at  persuasion.  It  is  a  misfortune  to 
restrict  the  term  "  persuasive "  to  any  one  class  of 
discourses ;  but  no  other  one  word  designates  the  thing 
by  which  a  certain  class  of  sermons  are  distinguished. 
It  includes  all  those  sermons  the  immediate  object  of 
which  is  persuasion.  The  key-note  of  the  persuasive 
sermon,  technically  so  called,  is  urgency  to  present 
a<?tion. 

2d,  Before  leaving  this  topic  of  the  classification  of       if 
sermons,  several  memoranda  deserve  mention. 

(1)  The  classification  here  commended  does  not  limit      

discourse  to  any  one  rhetorical  method.  The  prepon- 
derance r.f  one  method,  not  the  exclusion  of  others, 
gives  character  to  every  class.  We  pronounce  a  sermon 
explanatory,  if  explanation  leads  the  discussion.  Illus- 
tration, argument,  hortation    may  all  exist  in  it,  but 


jry^jy2-y__^^  -    THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  rn 

^  Only  as  subordinates.  Sc  each  element,  in  its  turn, 
may  lead  the  discussion;  and  the  sermon  is  classed 
accordingly.  A  classification  which  should  leave  no 
room  for  this  intermingling  of  rhetorical  elements  would 
be  practically  useless.  Practice  would  leap  over  it. 
In  all  good  preaching  the  standard  elements  of  com- 
position are  constantly  interchanged,  but  always  witli 
subordination  of  the  majority  to  one.  Rhetoric  and 
practice  in  this  respect  exactly  tally.  Use  and  beauty 
require  the  same  thing. 

(2)  The   four  elements   of  discourse   recognized  in 
*this    classijB cation    cover   every   variety   of    oratorical 

composition.  Explanation,  illustration,  argument,  per- 
suasion are  all  that  exist  of  rhetorical  material  and 
method  with  which  to  deal.  One  or  more  of  these  four 
things  must  be  done  in  all  good  discourse ;  and  in  such 
discourse  nothing  else  can  be  done.  When  you  have 
exhausted  these  four  elements  of  speech,  you  have  ex- 
hausted all  the  resources  of  speech.  This  classification, 
therefore,  includes  all  the  variety  of  which  rational 
discourse  is  susceptible. 

(3)  The  proper  classification  of  sermons  is  funda- 
mental to  the  subject  of  unity  of  discourse.  A  sermon 
can  not  be  pointed  in  its  aim,  if  it  has  no  oneness  of 
rhetorical  character  by  which  to  classify  it.  The  same 
qualities  which  adjust  it  to  its  class  give  it  unity  as 
an  individual.  If  you  have  a  clear  idea  of  the  kind  of 
discourse  which  you  purpose  to  frame,  that  localizes 
your  sermon  where  it  belongs,  and  at  the  same  time 
goes  far  to  unify  it  as  a  rhetorical  structure.  Onenesa 
of  impression  results  from  the  same  process  by  which 
you  gain  oneness  of  construction. 

(4)  The  proper  classification  of  sermons  is  equally 
fundamental  to  the  subject  of  proportion  io^ireaching 


tJtct.  in.]  THE  SERMON:    ANALYSIS.  Z"* 

In  a  ministry  of  ten  years,  the  proportions  of  preaching 
depend  more  on  the  adjustment  of  the  four  grand 
methods  of  rhetorical  discussion  than  on  all  things  else 
combined.  No  variety  of  subject,  of  text,  of  occasion, 
of  audience,  will  save  you  from  monotony,  if  you  alwftya 
do  one  and  the  same  thing  with  subject,  text,  occasion, 
ftnd  audience.  Always  ex;^lain,  or  always  prove,  or 
always  paint,  or  always  exhort,  and  versatility  of  im- 
pression is  impossible,  though  you  range  the  universe^ 
for  themes.  Construct  your  sermons  for  ten  years  so 
that  you  have  symmetrical  proportions  of  argumenta- 
tive, of  illustrative,  of  explanatory,  and  of  persuasive 
materials,  and  you  have  symmetry  of  impression,  with- 
out the  possibility  of  monotony  or  of  distortion.  Be 
the  impression  strong  or  weak,  it  will  be  rounded.  It 
will  leave  no  blanks  and  no  excrescences. 

III.  We  have  thus  far  considered  the  sermon  in  its 
generic  idea  and  in  its  fundamental  varieties.  We  ha\re 
DOW  to  consider  the  analysis  of  a  sermon.  What  are 
its  constituent  parts? 

(1)  In  reply,  let  it  be  observed,  that  by  the  parts 
of  a  discourse  are  not  meant  portions  necessarily 
visible  as  such  to  the  eye  in  the  manuscript.  They 
are  not  apartments  in  the  area  of  a  sermon.  Some 
of  them  are  visibly  distinct  in  the  writing,  and  audibly 
distinct  in  the  delivery,  but  not  all  of  them. 

(2)  By  the  constituent  parts  of  a  sermon  are  not 
meant  parts  all  of  which  are  essential  in  every  dis- 
course. Nearly  all  of  them  are  so,  but  exceptions 
exist. 

(3)  By  the  constituent  parts  of  a  sermon  are  meant 
those  features  of  discourse,  which,  in  the  process  of  its 
construction,  must  engage  the  attention  of  the  preacher. 
If  sometimes  one^or  more  of  the  parts  of  a  discourse 


38  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [LEcn?.  m 

are  unnecessary,  still  a  preacher  must  consider  them, 
that  he  may  decide  intelligently  that  they  are  unneces- 
sary. Is  an  introduction  superfluous  in  a  given  sermon  ? 
Perhaps  so.  But  the  preacher  must  consider  whether 
or  not  it  be  so. 

(4)  Philosophically  regarded,  the  number  of  the 
parts  of  a  discourse  depends  on  the  limitation  of  terms. 
This  accounts  for  the  diversity  in  the  analyses  of  dis- 

curse  adopted  by  the  ancient  rhetoricians.  Thus 
Aristotle  reckons  four  parts  only,  the  introduction, 
the  propositionT^ie  proof,  the  conclusion.  Of  these, 
he  affirms  that  only  the  proposition  and  proof  are 
essential  to  the  rhetorical  completeness  of  a  discourse. 
Quintili^in_enaim^rates  five  parts,  the  introduction,  the 
narration,  the  proof,  the  refutation,  the  conclusion. 
Yet  there  is  no  material  distinction  between  Aris- 
totle's proposition,  and  Quintilian's  narration ;  between 
Aristotle's  proof,  and  Quintilian's  proof  and  refuta- 
tion. The  narration  in  Quintilian's  analysis  referred 
specially  to  forensic  address :  it  was  a  lawyer's  statement 
of  his  case.  This  corresponds  to  what  Aristotle  meant 
by  the  proposition.  Proof  and  refutation  also  are  parts 
of  one  process,  which  Aristotle,  with  a  sharper  ana- 
lytic eye  than  Quintilian,  discerns  as  such,  and  calls  by 
one  name.  Does  Aristotle,  then,  fail  to  recognize  the 
introduction,  when  he  pronounces  it  non-essential  to 
the  completeness  of  a  rhetorical  structure  ?  Not  at  all. 
In  a  proposition  he  would  in  that  case  include  all  that 
18  requisite  to  a  skillful  enunciation  of  the  subject. 
The  proposition  thus  extended  would  commonly  com- 
pnse  an  introduction. 

(5)  It  follows,  then,  that  the  question  whether  we 
shall  adopt  a  condensed  or  an  extended  analysis  of  a 
sermon  is  chiefly  one  of  convenience  in  criticism.     For 


LhU^- 


LiwUl.  m.j  THE  SERMON:    ANALYSIS.  39 

purely  scientific  theory,  the  more  condensed  analysis 
is  the  more  finished;  but,  for  convenience  in  practical 
criticism,  the  more  extended  subdivision  is  the  superior. 
I  prefer,  therefore,  to  enumerate  the  parts  of  a  sermon 
as  follows :  namely,  the  text,(the  explanation,  Ithe  intro- 
duction, the  proposition,  the  division,  the  development, 
and  the  conclusion.  Is  the  text  a  necessary  part  of  a 
sermon  ?  Yes,  or  no ;  on  the  same  principle  on  which 
Aristotle  in  one  view  admitted,  and  in  another  rejected, 
the  introduction.  Doubtless  a  complete  rhetorical  struc- 
ture on  a  scriptural  theme  may  be  formed  without  a 
text.  The  text  may  also  be  theoretically  regarded  as 
an  incident  to  the  proposition,  and  involved  in  the 
process  of  announcing  a  subject.  But  in  practice 
preachers  have  a  text:  it  is  in  practice  commonly 
distinct  from  the  proposition.  Important  homiletic 
questions  concern  it  as  a  text,  and  a  text  only :  there- 
fore it  is  convenient  to  treat  it  thus  in  homiletic  theory. 

IV.  We  recognize,  then,  seven  principal  parts  of  a 
discourse  for  the  pulpit,  under  the  titles  above  named. 
It  will  be  the  object  of  the  subsequent  lectures  to  con- 
sider them  in  their  order.  Before  doing  so,  however, 
I  wish  to  forewarn  you  of  several  things  which  may 
otherwise  occasion  you  some  disappointment  as  we 
proceed. 

Let  me  ask  you  to  observe,  first,  the  necessity  of 
minute  criticism  in  our  discussion  of  these  parts  of  a 
sermon.  Many  things  must  receive  attention  which 
may  appear  to  you  trivial.  Relatively  to  some  otLer 
things,  they  are  trivial,  considered  singly ;  but  in  the 
aggregate  they  are  not  so.  Preachers  err  egregiously 
who  trust  to  the  excellences  of  discourse  to  weigh  down 
minute  defects.  Multitudes  of  clergymen  suffer  under 
a  contra(;ted  usefulness,  because  their  sterling  virtues 


'> 


40  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING  [lect.  tn 

are  blocked  by  numberless  little  impediments  wbicb 
reduplicate  the  amount  of  friction.  A  commanding 
genius  is  required  to  force  tbe  way  to  results  through 
deficiencies  in  themselves  so  small  that  genius  despises 
them.  But  that  which  a  genius  can  do  successfully, 
I  can  not;  probably  you  can  not.  Chrysostom,  the 
golden-mouthed,  may  be  useful  in  spite  of  violations  of 
taste  which  would  bury  in  oblivion  a  pastor  of  wooden 
speech.  Besides,  it  is  the  inferior  genius  which  con- 
temns inferior  excellences.  The  very  first  order  of 
mind  does  no  such  thing.  Michael  Angelo  did  not 
think  it  beneath  him  to  execute  one  of  the  consummate 
marvels  of  his  genius  in  the  carving  of  a  peach-stone. 
So  the  most  exalted  style  of  manhood  in  the  ministry 
will  count  no  excellence  too  minute  to  subserve  the 
objects  of  the  pulpit.  Some  of  the  processes  of  preach- 
ing are  of  such  a  character,  that  no  genius  can  force 
them.  They  must  be  performed  warily,  gently,  scrupu- 
lously. They  are  like  the  movements  of  a  watch  :  only 
a  few  grains  of  sand  are  needed  to  clog  them ;  and  the 
more  perfect  the  movement,  the  more  easy  its  arrest. 

A  second  preliminary  suggestion  is  that  of  the  neces- 
sity of^rofuse  illustration  in  the  discussion  of  the  parts 
of  a  sermon.  Mr.  Dickens  says  that  criticism  in  litera- 
ture of  any  kind  "is  not  worth  a  farthing  without 
innumerable  examples."  This  is  doubly  apt  in  applica- 
tion to  homiletic  criticism.  The  mere  statement  and 
eulc  gy  of  principles,  however  minute,  form  the  most 
useless  kind  of  discourse  on  such  topics  as  must  come 
before  us.  ^  By  far  the  most  difficult  part  of  the  process 
needed  is  the  discovery  or  the  invention  of  pertinent 
illustrations.     ) 

A  third  suggestion,  preliminary  to  the  work  before 

us,  is  that  a  defect  in  preaching  often  needs  to  be  made 


ciiioi'  m.]  THE  SERMOK:   AKALYSIS.  41 

ludicrous  to  excite  our  repugnance  to  it  effectually.  A 
curious  phenomenon  in  literary  history  is  this,  that  the 
pulpit  has  tolerated  faults  which  literary  taste  endures 
nowhere  else.  The  seriousness  of  the  work  of  the  pul- 
pit seems  to  have  acted  as  a  shield  to  deformities  which 
good  taste  feels  to  be  intolerable  elsewhere.  There  is 
no  remedy  for  this  shelter  of  the  pulpit  from  robust 
criticism,  except  that  preachers  should  therefoje  be  more 
severe  in  their  criticism  of  themselves.  No  other  fault 
is  so  hurtful  as  one  which  is  sanctified  by  its  surround- 
ings. Honest  good  sense  may  see  it,  but  can  not  get 
at  it  through  fear  of  irreverence.  We  must  subject  our- 
selves to  healtful  criticism  in  such  a  case.  If  we  can 
fix  in  mind  a  vivacious  caricature  of  such  faults,  put 
them  into  the  dress  of  a  clown,  we  do  ourselves  a  good 
service.  Blessed  be  the  man  who  invented  caricature  ! 
We  are  compelled  to  practice  this  adroitness  on  our 
own  minds  to  spur  them  up  to  an  instinctive  repulsion 
of  a  fault  which  we  shall  tolerate  otherwise  on  the  plea 
^that  we  have  a  pious  object.  Set  that  down  as  the  plea 
of  mental  indolence :  it  is  nothing  else.  The  proper 
antidote  to  it  is  ridicule.  /  ^^ 

The  fourth  preliminary  remark  is  that  in  these  lee-  ^ 
tures  many  things  must  be  observed  the  necessity  of 
which  you  will  outgrow.  Homiletic  discipline  is  some- 
times undervalued  heedlessly  as  a  preacher  advances 
in  his  profession,  because  he  finds,  that,  in  some  respects, 
he  leaves  the  need  of  it  behind  him.  His  owa  good 
sense  teaches  him  some  of  its  lessons  so  thoroughly,  that 
he  begins  to  doubt  whether  the  time  ever  was  when  he 
did  not  know  them  by  heart.  But  homiletic  discipline 
^does  its  work  for  a  man,  if  it  expedites  his  experience.  v 

/    A  young  man  receives  a  great  boon  in  any  thing  which         J 
I     economizes  expenditure  of  his  early  manhood.     Horai-       ^ 


42  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lBCT.  lit 

letic  lectures,  therefore,  should  in  my  view  be  aimed 
at  the  early  years  of  practice  in  the  pulpit.  Their 
immediate  object  is  to  teach  a  man  how  to  begin  his 
work.  They  are  valuable  just  in  proportion  to  their 
power  to  diminish  the  inevitable  waste  of  early  effort 
to  its  minimum.  That  a  young  preacher  quickly  out- 
grows them  is  the  best  evidence  that  they  have  been 
effective.  I  That  discipline  in  every  thing  which  we 
outgrow  the  need  of  is  the  discipline  to  which  we  are 
the  most  deeply  indebted.  J  Literature  contains  no  other 
one  thing  to  which  we  owe  so  much  as  to  the  Roman 
alphabet. 

These  remarks  suggest  a  fifth  preliminary:  it  is 
that  homiletic  instruction  can  never  make  a  preacher. 
Unreasonable  expectations  often  defeat  the  very  object 
of  homiletic  discipline.  Men  often  come  to  it,  not  as 
to  discipline,  but  as  to  a  process  of  accumulation. 
They  expect  to  be  put  in  possession  of  a  new  power  of 
speech.  They  expect  homiletics  to  give  them  pulpit 
eloquence,  as  history  gives  them  the  opinions  of  the 
past,  and  dogmatic  theology  those  of  the  present. 
This  is  absurd.  Preaching  is  a  business.  Every  busi- 
ness must  be  Ji^arned  in_the  main  by  the  doing  of  it. 
The  theory  can  give  you  principles  to  start  with,  can 
forewarn  of  perils,  can  set  up  defenses,  can  disclose 
existing  faults  in  culture,  can  reveal  abnormal  tenden- 
cies of  mind,  and  disproportion  of  mental  character, 
can  do  all  that  theory  does  for  a  man  in  any  thing 
which  is  a  practical  business.  In  brief,  it  can  make 
the  business  practicable;  but  it  can  never  create  the 
dohig  of  it.  A  man  must  work  the  theory  into  his 
own  culture,  so  that  he  shall  execute  it  unconsciously. 
This  he  can  do  only  by  his  own  experience  of  the 
theory  in   his   own   practice   till  it  becomes  a  second 


LBCT.  in.]  THE  SERMON:    ANALYSIS.  43 

nature.  This  is  the  work  of  time.  We  learn  how  to 
live  by  living :  so  we  learn  how  to  preach  by  preach- 
ing. Yet  law,  principle,  theory  have  as  valuable  a  use 
in  the  one  case  as  in  the  other.  Vinet  says  that  the 
'' homiletics  of  the  study  should  leave  room  for  that  of 
the  temple  and  the  parish."  Not  so:  the  homiletics 
of  tte,  study  is  that  of  the  temple  and  the  parish.  So 
far  as  it  becomes  a  part  of  the  preacher  himself,  he  will 
be  constantly  emitting  it  from  his  own  culture  in 
expedients  of  usefulness  which  will  be  the  legitimate 
fruits  of  it,  but  which  will  seem  to  him  to  be  the  spon- 
taneous production  of  the  hour 


LECTURE  IV. 

THE  TEXT :    HISTORY,  USES. 

The  fiist  thing  which  attracts  the  attention  of  a  critic 
of  pulpit  discourse  is  the  custom  of  founding  it  upon 
selections  of  inspired  words.  It  will  aid  us  in  obtain- 
ing the  true  theory  of  the  text  as  a  part  of  pulpit  dis- 
course, to  consider,  in  the  first  place  :  — 

I.  Some  notices  of  the  history  of  the  custom  of 
employing  texts.  The  sources  of  information  on  this 
topic  are  not  fertile.  Objections  to  the  custom  are 
almost  wholly  of  modern  origin.  At  least,  if  objections 
existed  in  the  early  Church,  they  have  not  lived  in  his- 
toric records  of  opinion. 

1st,  We  may  observe,  first,  the  Jewish  origin  of  the 
custom.  It  had  its  birth,  unquestioL-ably  in  the  old 
Jewish  reverence  for  the  letter  of  the  word  of  God. 
What,  then,  was  the  position  of  the  text  in  the  Jewish 
idea  of  a  religious  discourse?  In  the  earliest  Jewish 
worship  the  text  was  the  chief  part  of  the  discourse. 
I>ehig  originally  a  direct  commimication  from  God,  it 
absorbed  all  the  interest  of  a  hearer  in  itself.  When 
first  revealed,  it  must  have  stood  alone,  without  enlarge- 
ment, without  comment.  The  very  words  of  God,  and 
no  other,  were  the  first  sermon.  Large  portions  of  the 
Scriptures  of  those  times  were  chosen  as  the  themes  of 
meditation  in  the  temple.     Preaching,  other  tlian   the 


user.  IV.]  THE  TEXT:  HISTORY.  45 

reading  of  the  law  and  the  prophets,  can  scaicely  be 
said  to  have  existed.  The  nearest  approximation  to  it 
was  simply  the  interpretation  of  the  passage  which  had 
previously  been  read.  In  the  Jewish  idea,  the  inspired 
text  is  the  sermon;  comment  upon  it,  an  appendage, 
Moie  than  this  prevailed  subsequently  in  the  later 
worship  of  the  synagogue.  Our  Saviour  and  some  of 
the  Apostles  made  the  reading  of  the  law  in  the  syna- 
gogue an  occasion  of  extended  exposition  and  hortation. 
Their  doing  so  excited  no  surprise  among  the  Jews,  it 
being  already  an  established  usage  among  them.  Still, 
the  central  idea  of  preaching  was  exposition.  The  in- 
spired text  was  the  center  of  interest. 

2d,  Observe,  secondly,  the  transfer  of  the  custom 
of  employing  texts,  from  Jewish  to  Christian  usage. 
Apostolic  usage  was  not  uniform.  The  Apostles  often 
preached  without  texts.  An  evident  reason  for  this  is 
found,  as  in  the  case  of  our  Lord  himself,  in  the  fact 
that  they  were  themselves  inspired  teachers.  But  we 
find  no  trace  of  preaching  without  a  text  among  the 
immediate  successors  of  the  Apostles.  The  instant  that 
inspiration  ceased,  the  Jewish  reverence  for  the  inspired 
records  was  revived,  and  the  only  model  of  preaching 
known  for  some  centuries  was  the  homily;  that  is, 
as  we  should  call  it,  a  practical  exposition,  or,  as  the 
Scotch  clergy  would  term  ii,  an  expository  lecture. 
Sometimes  several  homilies  were  preached  on  one  occa- 
sion, each  occupying  from  six  to  twelve  minutes.  The 
eiymology  of  the  word  "text "  suggests  very  nearly  the 
ancient  idea  of  its  relation  to  the  homily :  it  was  textus 
(woven  in),  the  warp  and  woof  of  the  whole  pro 
duction. 

3d,  Observe,  thirdly,  the  Romish  corruption  oi  the 
custom  of  employing  texts.     In  this  period  of  the  hi* 


<^A-/-^V 


46  the/theory  of  preaching.  [lkct.  ly 

tory  of  the  custom  several  things  are  noticeable.  The 
allegorical  principles  of  interpretation  applied  to  the 
Scriptures  by  Origen  and  others  after  him  destroyed  the 
legitimate  force  of  the  custom.  It  destroyed  logical 
connection  between  text  and  homily.  A  text  which  is 
torn  from  its  connections  in  inspired  usage,  or  to  which 
an  imaginary  sense  is  given,  is  r.o  text.  This  was  largely 
true  of  the  use  of  texts  in  the  time  of  Augustine.  It 
was  the  taste  of  theageto__make  a  text  mean  any 
thing  that  was  convenient,  or  fancifully  attractive,  or 
more  especially  any  thing  that  should  seem  to  support 
the  dominant  philosophy  of  the  times.  The  Protestant 
pulpit  owes  nearly  all  the  puerility,  and  the  unscholarly 
license  which  it  tolerates  in  the  interpretation  and  uses 
of  texts,  to  that  period  in  which  grammatico-historical 
exegesis  was  abandoned,  and  the  mystical  interpreta- 
tion took  its  place. 

Moreover,  the  unsettling  of  the  inspired  canon  at  that 
time  corrupted  the  sources  of  texts.  The  consequence 
was  that  sermons  were  often  preached  upon  passages 
from  apocryphglsources.  The  reverence  for  philoso- 
phy also  weakened  the  clerical  reverence  for  texts 
of  the  Scriptures.  In  many  instances  it  was  deemed  a 
matter  of  indifference  whether  texts  were  chosen  from 
insfircd  sources  or  not.  f  Melanchthon  says  that  they 
were  sometimes  taken  frbm  the  ethics  ofAristotle.^ 
This  was  perfectly  natural.  A  forced  interpretation  of 
inspired  language  brings  it  into  conflict  with  the  com- 
mon sense  of  men.  In  such  a  conflict,  no  language  can 
hold  its  place  in  the  reverence  of  the  human  mind. 
When  it  had  become  the  usage  of  the  pulpit  to  employ 
a  biblical  text  as  no  other  language  would  be  seriously 
employed  by  a  sane  mind,  it  was  an  improvement  to 
turn  from  St.  Paul  to  Aristotle,  whose  language  had  not 


LBCT.  IV.]  THE  TEXT:    HISTORY.  47 

yet  undergone  distortion.  As  a  consequence  of  the 
corruption  of  texts,  some  of  the  Fathers  preached  with- 
out a  text.  This,  too,  was  a  natural  result.  Here  and 
there  a  vigorous  thinker  would  revolt  from  the  puerility 
of  the  schoolmen,  and  throw  off  all  trammels  upon  free 
discourse.  /  Some  of  the  sermons  of  Chrysostom  were 
preached  without  a  text.  Augustine  preached  over 
four  hundred  sermons  without  texts.  1 


During  this  period  the  topical  sermon  came  into  exist- 
ence. For  the  first  twelve  centuries  of  the  Christian 
era,  the  restriction  of  the  text  to  an  isolated  verse,  or 
fragnient  of  a  verse,  of  the  Bible  was  unknown.  The 
topical  sermon,  therefore,  was  an  innovation.  Originally 
the  Christian  sermon  was  an  exposition,  and  only  that. 
In  England  it  was  called,  for  some  centuries,  " postillat-  \l^r^^Q7 
ing."  The  only  kind  of  preaching  which  varied  from 
it  was  that  of  preaching  without  a  text,  and  which  was  ^  (j^ 
called  "  declaring ;  "  that  is,  the  preacher  "  declared  " 
his  subject  and  discussion  without  explaining  any  text. 

The  assertion  that  the  use  of  texts  met  with  no 
important  dissent  is  not  true  of  such  a  use  of  the  text 
as  the  topical  sermon  creates.  The  restriction  of  the 
text  to  a  verse,  or  a  fragment  of  a  verse,  which  is  com- 
mon in  the  modern  topical  discourse,  met  with  very 
strenuous  opposition  for  two  hundred  years.  It  origi- 
nated about  1200  A.  D. ;  and  the  older  clergy  of  that 
date  contested  it  stoutly.  Among  others,  Roger  Bacon 
wrote  against  it  with  great  severity.  He  prayed  God 
to  "  banish  this  conceited  and  artificial  way  of  preach- 
ing from  his  Church."  The  notion  of  the  topical  sermon 
which  he  entertained  was  a  singular  one.  It  lets  ua 
into  the  clerical  life  of  the  times  significantly.  He 
writes,  "  The  greatest  part  of  our  prelates,  having  but 
little  knowledge  in  divinity,  and  having  been  little  used 


/ 


I  ^?   s   A     s.   v..  ^ 


U'Y*^v^^     •    V"^^^'^ 


48  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  it. 

to  preaching  in  their  youth,  when  they  become  bishops, 
and  are  sometimes  obliged  to  preach,  are  under  the 
necessity  of  begging  and  borrowing  the  sermons  of  cer- 
tain novices,  who  have  invented  a  new  way  of  preach- 
ing, by  endless  divisions  and  quibblings,  in  which  there 
is  neither  sublimity  of  style,  nor  depth  of  wisdom.  .  .  . 
rt  will  never  do  any  good."  Thus  judged  one  of  the 
wisest  men  of  his  age,  of  a  style  of  preaching  which 
has  been  the  predominant  one  in  this  country,  and  spe- 
cially in  New  England,  for  two  hundred  years,  and  in 
^  which  are  to  be  found  the  most  valuable  contributions 
to  theology  which  tliis  country  has  produced.  To  the 
foregoing  facts  should  be  added,  that  preaching  itself, 
during  the  period  of  the  Romish  decline,  gradually  fell 
into  disuse.  Indolence  in  the  priesthood,  and  supersti- 
tion in  the  Church  displaced  the  pulpit,  and  exalted 
f^  the  altar. 
,  4th,  The  modern  period  in  the  history  of  the  custom 

of  employing  texts  dates  from  the  Reformation.  It  is 
characterized  by  three  features  which  deserve  mention. 
rf  /  (1)  We  find  a  return  to  the  ancient  usage  mspectin^ 
the  sources  of  texts.  The  unanimity  of  the  reformers 
in  this  regard  is  remarkable.  I  have  met  with  no  evi- 
dence of  a  solitary  instance  in  which  any  other  than 
a  biblical  source  was  acknowledged  by  them  in  the 
choice  of  a  text.  The  religious  vitality  of  the  Reforma- 
tion is  indicated  in  no  other  one  thing  so  signally  as  in 
this  backward  spring  from  human  to  inspired  authori- 
:ies,  in  the  search  for  a  preacher's  texts. 

(2)  Another  feature  which  characterizes  this  period 
is  a  similar  return  to  the  ancient  simplicity  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  texts.  This  movement  was  more  gradual, 
and  not  universal.  But  the  tendency  of  modern  scholar- 
ship for  three  centuries  has  been  to  settle  the  interpre- 


LBCT.  IV.]  THifl  TEXT :    HISTORY.  49 

tation  of  texts  on  the  same  principles  of  grammatico- 
historical  exegesis  by  which  common  sense  interprets 
the  language  of  any  other  ancient  volume. 

(3)  A  third  feature  by  which  this  modern  peiiod  is 
characterized  is  a  variety  of  usage  respecting  th^_Qbject3 
for  which  texts  are  employed.  The  etymological  idea 
of  a  text  is  not  now  universal  in  the  usage  of  tho 
pulpit.  Modern  sermons  are  more  than  homilies.  Dis- 
cussion of  subjects  independently  of  texts  has  grown 
upon  modern  usage  immensely.  As  familiarity  with 
the  Scriptures  is  extended  among  the  people,  the  effect 
must  necessarily  be  to  throw  the  pulpit  forward  upon 
more  elaborate  discussions  for  the  materials  of  sermons. 
Still  we  have  not  reached  any  uniformity  of  usage  in 
reference  to  the  objects  of  texts :  it  is  to  be  hoped  that 
no  such  uniformity  will  be  established.  We  need  the 
present  diversity  to  meet  diverse  wants  of  the  popular 
mind.  JV 

II.     We  proceed  now  to  observe  briefly  some  of  the  Qk^J  i« 
objections  to  the  custom  of  employing  texts.    Of  these 
the   following   are   the   chief.     It   is  claimed  that  the 
custom  tends  to  attenuate  the  material  of  a  sermon.    // 
Voltaire,  for  this  reason,  expressed  the  wish  that  Bour- 
daloue  had  banished  this  custom  from  the  pulpit.     It  is    ^     . 
urged  further  that  the  custom  tends  to  create  pedantic        X 
methods  of  preaijhingr.     Sismondi,  in  his  "History  of 
the  Italian  Republics,"  attributes  the  decay  of  secular 
eloquence  in  Italy  to  the  loss  of  clerical  eloquence  from 
the  pulpit,  occasioned  by  the  priesthood  in  preaching 
from  texts.     Moreover,  it  is  said  that  the  custom  tends      ^x 
to  contract  the  range  of  the  subjects  of   the  pulpit. 
Vinet,  in  urging  thisobjectlon,  says  very  truly,  "  Ex- 
perience is  a  book.     Experience  furnishes  texts."     The 
question  is  a  fair  one,  then.  Shall  a  preacher  ciamD  his 


50  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  rv 

experience  to  bring  the  themes  of  his  pulpit  within  the 
/     J    range  of  scriptural  texts  ?     Again :  it  is  objected  that 
*^         the  custom  tends  to  isolate  the  pulpit  from  the  usages 
of  secular  eloquence.     It  is  a  fair  inquiry,  Why  do  not 
secular  orators  employ  texts,  or  their  equivalent  ?    Maj 
not  the  proverbial  dullness  of  a  sermon  be  attributable, 
m  part,  to  an  unnatural  separation  between  the  pulpit 
and  the  bar,  or  the  Senate,  \ji  this  respect  ?     IMight  not 
something  of  the  vivacity  of  the  platform  be  given  to 
the  pulpit,  if  the  formula  of  a  text  were  abandoned  ? 
j^\     This  suggests  a  further  objection:  that  the  custom 
S    /tends   to   stifiPen   the   routine    of    the    pulpit.      Glaus 
/   Harms,  in  his  work  on  "  Practical  Theology,"  expresses 
the  opinion  that  this  custom  has  been  prejudicial,  "  not 
only  to  the  perfection  of  preaching  as  an  art,  but  also 
to  Christian  knowledge,  and,  what  is  more  serious,  to 
the  Christian  life."'    It  is  a  reasonable  query,  What  is 
to  prevent  the  use  of  a  text  from  degenerating  into  an 
utterly  lifeless  form  ?     Is  it  not  often  like  the  address 
and  subscription  of  a  letter,  —  a  form  which  the  hearer 
feels  to  be  void  of  meaning?     If  so,  is  it  not  all  the 
worse  for  its  inspired  origin  ?     Finally,  William  Lloyd 
/      Grarrison   urges   against   the   custom    its   tendency   to 
y     antiquate  the  pulpit.     He  claims  that  it  assumes  an- 
tiquity to  be  synonymous  with  authority ;  that  it  pro- 
motes silence  upon  existing  forms  of  sin  on  the  plea  of 
fidelity  to  an  ancient  type  of  thought  and  of  religious 
experience.     In  a  word,  it  tends  to  give  to  the  past  a 
moral  ascendency  over  the  present,  to  which  nothing  in 
the  experience  of  the  past  entitles  it,  and  which  is  not 
commended  by  the  example  of  Christ  and  the  Apostles. 
Respecting  all  these  objections,  I  can  not  but  think 
that  something  must,  in  candor,  be  conceded  to  them. 
Vinet  puts  ;he  case  fairly  when  he  imagines  a  stranger, 


LECT.  IV.]  THE  TEXT  :    USES.  5J 

unacquainted  with  the  usages  of  the  pulpit,  and  know 
ing  only  its  object,  as  listening  for  the  first  time  to  a 
Bermon,  and  learning  that  this  entire  department  of 
eloquence  is  subjected  to  the  rule  of  developing,  not 
the  idea  of  the  speaker,  but  a  text  clipped  from  a 
foreign  discourse.  Would  the  usage,  to  such  a 
stranger,  appear  to  be  a  natural  one  ?  If  there  were 
not  opposing  advantages  attending  the  use  of  texts,  or 
even  if  the  abuses  indicated  by  objectors  were  inevita- 
ble, the  custom  would  not  be  worth  defending.  It  is 
not  enjoined  on  the  pulpit  by  inspired  authority.  It 
must  exist,  if  at  all,  on  its  intrinsic  merits.  The  revul- 
sion of  some  minds  from  it  is  not  unnatural  in  view  of 
the  puerilities  to  which  it  has  often  given  rise.  Still 
the  custom  will  be  found  to  be  defensible  on  the 
ground  that  its  abuses  are  not  unavoidable,  and  its  uses 
are  of  surpassing  moment. 

III.  In  defense  of  the  custom  of  employing  texts,  we 
proceed,  then,  to  consider  the  positive  uses  of  texts. 
These  demand  consideration  in  a  twofold  aspect.  They 
are  advantages  supporting  the  custom  of  employing 
texts:  they  are  also  objects  to  be  aimed  at  in  the  selec- 
tion of  texts.  That  is  the  best  text  which  secures  the 
largest  number,  and  the  most  vital,  of  the  objects  of 
having  a  text. 

1st,  Of  the  positive  uses  of  texts,  may  be  named, 
first,  that  of  giving  inspired  authority  to  the  sentiments 
of  a  sermon.  This  is  the  prime  object  of  a  text.  This 
if-  a  use  which  the  best  class  of  texts  always  does  secure. 
This,  doubtless,  is  the  radical  idea  which  lies  at  the 
foundation  of  the  usage. 

(1)  This  u^e  of  a  text  outweighs  much  objection  to 
the  custom  of  preaching  from  texts.  It  answers  abun- 
dantly Voltaire's   objection.     An   inspired   thought  is 


52  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHINQ  [user.  iT 

not  likely  to  be  the  material  of  an  attenuated  discourse. 
If  the  sermon  be  diluted,  the  defect  is  not,  probably,  in 
the  text.  Voltaire  did  not  fail  to  appreciate  the  value 
of  a  pithy  saying  of  genius  as  a  motto  of  discourse. 
Why  may  not  inspiration  claim  at  least  as  much  respect 
as  the  utterances  of  genius  ?  Very  much  of  the  rever- 
ence which  is  silently  paid  by  the  popular  mind  to  the 
pulpit  is  probably  due  to  the  secret  educating  power  of 
this  custom  of  the  pulpit. 

Again :  this  use  of  a  text  answers  Mr.  Garrison's  ob- 
jection. If  the  Bible  be  an  inspired  volume,  it  is  in- 
spired for  a  purpose.  If  inspired  for  a  purpose,  it  is 
divinely  fitted  to  that  purpose.  If  fitted  to  that  pur- 
pose, it  is  a  p.nTnpftTTH__nf  f.hp  tr^iths^most  necessary  to 
the  world  in  all  time.  Distinctions  of  past,  present, 
and  future  do  not  destroy  its  pertinence  as  a  whole. 
Much  more  inspired  trutibi  has  been  uttered  to  men 
than  the  Bible  contains.  The  Bible  is  God's  selection 
from  the  accumulated  archives  of  inspiration.  Its  his- 
tories, its  biographies,  its  liturgies,  its  psalmody,  its 
doctrines,  its  precepts,  its  prophecies  ;  its  pictures  of 
character,  divine,  angelic,  and  human ;  the  secret  life 
with  God  which  it  portrays  ;  and  its  disclosures  of  the 
eternal  worlds,  —  all  are  selected  fragments,  put  togeth- 
er for  a  purpose,  like  a  mosaic.  Such  a  book,  framed  for 
such  a  purpose,  can  never,  as  a  whole,  be  antiquated.  It 
can  contain  nothing,  which,  for  the  purposes  of  such  a 
volume,  can  ever  be  obsolete.  The  world  will  always 
iT-eed  it,  and  will  need  the  whole  of  it.  As  a  unit,  it  will 
be  as  fresh  to  the  last  man  as  to  you  and  to  me.  This, 
then,  is  the  strong  point  in  the  claim  which  the  pulpit 
asserts  to  reverence  for  its  usage  in  preaching  from 
texts,  —  that  they  give  divine  authority  to  the  senti- 
ments of  the  pulpit.     Yield  this,  and  you  revolutionize 


LKCT.  iv.J  THE  TEXT :    USES.  5S 

the  pulpit  in  less  than  one  generation.  The  instincfca 
of  infidelity  are  very  keen  in  scenting  out  and  worrying 
down,  if  possible,  a  clerical  usage  like  this,  which  is  the 
most  vital  exponent  the  pulpit  has  of  its  own  faith  and 
of  the  popular  faith  in  inspiration. 

(2)  Further,  this  use  of  a  text  as  an  inspired  author- 
ity is  of  special  value  in  the  preaching  of  obnoxious  doc- 
trines. On  the  doctrine  of  future  punishment,  for  ex- 
ample, it  is  not  the  argumentations  of  the  pulpit  which 
hold  the  popular  mind  to  the  truth  most  rigidly :  it  is 
the  downright  and  inevitable  authority  of  a  few  texts. 
He  would  be  a  very  unwise  man  who  should  throw 
away  his  advantage  in  advancing  to  the  discussion  of 
such  a  doctrine  under  the  cover  of  a  divinely  spoken 
word.  It  is  more  than  the  protection  of  a  masked  bat- 
tery. This  protective  bearing  of  a  text  is  specially 
assisted  by  the  position  of  a  text  in  the  construction  of 
a  sermon.  The  text  usually  heads  the  discourse.  It 
predisposes  a  reverent  hearer  to  listen  with  a  docile  tem- 
per, if  a  preacher  advances  behind  inspired  leadership. 
Divine  words  first,  the  human  teaching  in  the  sequel : 
this  order  of  thought  tends  to  secure  reverent  assent. 

(3)  But  does  not  this  very  subjection  of  the  human 
to  the  divine,  as  has  been  suggested,  hamper  the  free- 
dom of  the  pulpit?  Not  at  all.  For  we  notice,  fur- 
ther, that  this  use  of  a  text  encourages  a  regulated 
freed  ornjr)  ^he-pri1pit.  Some  subjects,  it  is  true,  are 
not  expressed  in  any  scriptural  text ;  but,  if  they  are 
not  expressed,  they  may  be  contained  in  a  principle 
which  is  expressed.  Some  principles,  it  is  true,  are  not 
affirmed  in  a  declarative  form  ;  but  they  may  be  implied 
in  a  narrative,  a  parable,  an  act,  a  character  which  is 
recorded.  Some  subjects,  it  is  true,  are  not  logically 
contained  in  any  such  text ;  but  they  may  be  rhetori' 


54  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHIMQ.  [lect.  n 

cally  suggested  by  a  text,  and  the  text  may  be  used  by 
a  manly  accommodation  to  the  theme.  Here,  we  con- 
tend, is  all  the  freedom  that  the  pulpit  needs,  all  that  a 
preacher  of  a  revealed  religion  has  any  right  to  desire. 
If  a  subject  is  not  expressed  in  any  scriptural  passage, 
and  is  not  contained  in  any  scriptural  principle,  and  is 
not  implied  in  any  scriptural  narrative,  parable,  evert, 
character,  and  is  not,  by  any  manly  association  of 
thought,  suggested  by  any  scriptural  language,  the 
preacher  of  a  revealed  system  of  truth  will  not  waste 
much  time  in  defending  such  a  subject  against  the  pov- 
erty of  the  Bible  in  not  furnishing  a  text  for  it.  It  is  a 
healthful  corrective  of  idiosyncrasy  in  a  preacher,  that 
if  he  proposes,  as  an  ancient  pastor  of  the  Hollis-street 
Church,  Boston,  once  did,  to  preach  on  "  The  Morals 
and  Manners  of  the  Marquis  de  Rochefoucault,"  he 
should  find  himself  driven  out  of  the  Bible,  as  the 
preacher  was,  and  compelled  to  preach  without  a  text. 

(4)  This  view  suggests,  further,  that  this  use  of  a 
text  tends  to  put  a  preacher  in  his  true  relation  to 
divine  authority.  The  real  character  of  a  preacher  as 
a  minister  of  God,  speaking  for  God,  uttering  God's 
words,  unfolding  God's  thoughts,  is  silently  kept  before 
his  own  mind,  and  before  that  of  his  hearers.  The  ten- 
dency is  to  impart  a  most  vitalizing  spiritual  influence 
to  both,  —  to  him,  in  giving;  to  them,  in  receiving.  If 
secular  orators  had  an  inspired  collection  of  secular 
themes  of  discourse,  nothing  but  depravity  would  pre- 
vent their  using  it  as  the  clergy  use  the  Scriptures. 
Upon  all  the  principles  of  high  art  in  public  speech, 
they  would  be  dolts  if  they  did  not  use  it. 

A  curious  phenomenon  is  observable  here  in  secular 
eloquence ;  it  is  that  it  has,  in  fact,  invented  for  itself 
expedients  which  are  in  some  respe'jts  eqiiivalent  to  the 


LECT.  IV.]  THE   TEXT :    USES.  66 

texts  of  the  pulpit.  What  is  the  object  of  indictments 
and  other  legal  forms,  the  reading  of  which  precedes 
forensic  addresses  ?  Wr  at  is  the  object  of  resolutions 
and  bills,  the  reading  of  which  introduces  legislative 
speeches  ?  As  related  \o  secular  oratory,  they  are  de- 
signed to  put  the  speakt-r  at  once  in  position  with  the 
business  in  hand  and  with  his  audience.  When  Daniel 
Webster  rose  to  reply  *;o  Gen.  Hayne  in  the  United 
States  Senate,  he  answered  in  a  breath  much  of  the  ^ 
harangue  of  his  opponent,  and  put  himself  in  position 
before  his  auditors,  by  baying,  "  Mr.  President,  I  call 
for  the  reading  of  the  resolution  before  the  Senate." 
This  was  no  more  nor  le.^s  than  taking  a  text. 

2d,  Of  the  positive  uses  of  texts,  and  the  objects  to  O 
be  aimed  at  in  their  snlection,  the  second  is  that  of 
promoting  popular  intelligence  in  the  perusal  of  the 
Scriptures.  It  is  not  a  small  benefit  to  a  people  to 
have  a  hundred  passages  of  the  Bible  expounded  every 
year  from  the  pulpit  with  the  aid  of  the  latest  scholar 
ship  in  exegesis. 

(1)  Observe  especially  that  this  use  of  a  text  grows    ^fj 
naturally  out  of  the  preaching  of  a  revealed  religion, 
and  that  the  popular  knowledge  of  such  a  religion  will 
be   proportioned   to  that  of  preachers  in  their  use  of 
texts.      The   popular  mind   obtains  unconsciously  its 
principles  of  interpretation  from  the  usage  of  the  pul- 
pit.     As  the  one  is,  so  is  the  other.     Clearness  in  the 
pulpit   is   good   sense   in   the  pew.     IMysticism  in  the  ^ 
pulpit  is  nonsense  in  the  pew.     The  absence  of  exposi-  jn  J 
tion  from  the  pulpit  is  ignorance  of  the  Bible  in  the        . 
pew.     Like   priest,  like   people.     The  Sabbath  school,    ^ 
Bible  classes,  family  instruction,  under  a  vigorous  min-     f*  i^ 
istry,  will  in   the   long    run  take   character   from   the 
pulpit.     The   key  which   will   wind   up   and  keep   in 


I 


i 


f)6  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  r» 

movement  the  whole  machinery  of  popular  giDwth  in  a 
knowledge  of  the  Scriptures  is  the  handling  of  texts 
by  a  skillful  preacher. 

(2)  Importance  is  added  to  this  use  of  a  text  by 
the  fact  that  the  exposition  of  texts  is  the  exposition 
of  the  choicest  passages  of  the  Bible.  Well-chosen 
texts  are  the  gems  of  scriptural  thought.  They  rep- 
resent fundamental  doctrines,  and  vital  principles,  and 
essential  duties,  and  central  characters,  and  critical 
events,  and  thrilling  scenes,  and  profound  experiences. 
They  are  the  dense  points  of  revelation,  at  which  light 
^is  most  vivid.  The  Bible  is  dotted  over  with  them. 
To  see  them  is  to  see  the  whole  firmament  of  truth  in 
which  they  are  set.  They  are  constellations  in  a  cloud- 
less sky.  An  intelligent  and  scholarly  explanation  of 
a  thousand  texts  might  indoctrinate  a  people  in  the 
whole  system  of  biblical  truth. 

3d,  A  third  use  of  a  text,  and  object  in  its  selection, 
is  to  cherish  in  the  minds  of  hearers  an  attachmeuL^to 
^he  language  of  the  Bible.  In  the  popular  notion  of 
-eligious  truth,  words  very  easily  become  things. 
Never  is  language  more  readily  consolidated  into  a 
living  thing  around  which  the  reverence  of  a  people 
will  grow,  than  when  that  language  is  long  used  to 
express  their  religious  convictions,  or  their  religious 
inheritance  from  their  fathers.  Therefore,  if  reverence 
be  not  cherished  for  the  scriptural  forms  of  truth,  it 
will  be  for  uninspired  forms.  The  popular  mind  will 
have  it  for  something.  We  are  suffering  to-day  from  a 
morbid  attachment,  in  some  sections  of  the  Church,  to 
uninspired  standards  of  religious  thought.  A  rever- 
ence is  cherished  for  technicalities  of  theological  science, 
and  for  certain  forms  of  truth  expressed  in  ritual  and 
liturgic   service,  which  nothing  should  receive  but  an 


LBCT.  IV.]  THE  TEXT :    USES.  57 

inspired  production.  It  has  been  believed  by  more 
than  one  of  the  lovers  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer, 
that  its  authors  and  compilers  were  under  the  guidance 
of  inspiration  in  their  work.  Views  of  divine  super- 
intendence have  been  advanced  in  behalf  of  the  West- 
minster Confession,  which  involve  a  subordinate  degree 
of  the  inspired  gifts  in  the  leaders  of  the  Westminster 
Assembly.  Similar  ideas  have  been  expressed  con- 
cerning the  works  of  John  Wesley.  A  very  intelligent 
Baptist  clergyman  once  inquired  of  me  if  I  did  not 
believe  that  something  very  like  apostolic  inspiration 
was  imparted  to  Robert  Hall. 

Why  does  a  most  excellent  missionary  society  report 
its  labors  in  a  destitute  section  of  Pennsylvania,  as 
consisting  of  a  distribution  of  Bibles  and  Testaments 
to  the  number  of  five  hundred  and  thirty-nine,  and  of 
prayer-books  three  thousand  two  hundred  and  seventy  ? 
Why  is  it,  that,  in  our  own  communion,  that  phrase- 
ology in  theological  controversy  which  is  most  hotly 
contested,  and  is  deemed  most  sacred,  because  most 
essential  to  truth,  in  the  view  of  the  contending  parties, 
is  not  scriptural  phraseology  ? 

This  leads  us  to  a  further  fact,  which  is  that  some 
truths  can  not  be  concisely  presented  to  the  popular 
mind  otherwise  so  clearly  as  by  the  exact  scriptural 
forms  of  them.  The  statements  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity  in  many  of  our  standards  —  are  they  no:  m  to- 
rious  failures?  It  has  cost  the  pulpit  infinitely  more 
labor  to  explain  and  (^^fend  them  than  it  would  have 
done  to  explain  and  defend  the  Scriptures  on  that  doo 
triLe./  Some  such  truths  it  will  not  do  to  define  to  the 
popular  mind  as  we  should  to  the  scholastic  mind.  )  A 
definition  whi:h  is  metaphysically  true  may  be  practi- 
cally false      The  connection  of  the  race  witli  Adam, 


68  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  rv 

and  the  character  \.l  infants  it  *s  unwise  to  attempt  to 
define  to  the  popular  comprehension  beyond  the  very 
limited  notices  taken  of  eith'>r  subject  in  the  Bibla 
We  are  almost  certain  of  comii*g  into  conflict  with  the 
necessary  beliefs  of  men,  if  we  make  the  attempt,  —  a 
thing  which  the  Scriptures  ne^  er  do.  Let  us  have  this 
instinct  of  popular  reverence,  then,  in  its  legitimate 
uses.  Let  us  so  treat  uninspired  formularies  as  to  sub- 
ject them,  in  the  habits  of  th--.  popular  feeling,  to  the 
inspired  standards,  no  more,  anJ  no  less,  and  no  other. 

This  view  meets  the  objection  to  the  custom,  drawn 
from  its  abuse  by  pedantic  pjeachers.  Sismondi  may 
have  been  reasonably  disgusted  by  the  pedantry  of  the 
priesthood  of  his  day ;  but  a  scholarly  care  for  verbal 
exposition  of  an  inspired  bock:  is  not  pedantry.  An 
inspired  production  deserves  a  minuteness  of  exegesis 
of  which  no  other  production  i^  worthy.  The  words  of 
the  Scriptures  are  to  the  pope  lar  mind  like  the  words 
of  a  will  by  which  an  inheritance  is  conveyed.  The 
presumption  is  that  any  and  r  very  word  is  important, 
and  may  be  emphatic. 

4th,  A  fourth  use  of  a  text  is  to  facilitate  a  hearer's 
remembrance  of  the  truths  presented.  The  best  texts 
are  brief  statements  of  truth.  They  are  easily  remem- 
bered. Moreover,  the  best  tex.Vs  contain  a  comprehen- 
sive view  of  the  whole  scope  of  the  sermons  founded 
upon  them.  The  most  felicito  isly  chosen  texts  are  the 
sermons  in  miniature.  The  se'mons  are  in  them  like 
an  oak  in  the  acorn.  To  recall  them  is  to  recall  the 
train  of  thought  which  the  sermons  develop.  Further: 
inspired  language,  other  things  being  equal,  impresses 
the  memory  the  more  strongly  for  being  inspired.  It  is 
authoritative  language.  Memi  ry  is  assisted  by  rever- 
ence for  authority.     Inspired  h  iguage  is  usually  of  un- 


LBCT.  IV.]  THE  TEXT :    USES  69 

common  raciness.     The  Bible  is  the  most  brilliant  book     ( 
in  the  world,  in  respect  of  style.     It  abounds  in  sen  ^\ 
tentious  utterances  of  truth.     It  is  a  book  of  axioms,      y 
Its  imagery  is  fascinating.     Its  style  pulsates  with  life.     ( 
It  has  a  wonderful  power  to  fasten  itself  in  the  human     I 
inemory.      The   first   missionaries   in   the    South    Sea     \ 
Islands   found   that   their   most   ignorant   converts   to     / 
Christianity   were    attracted   to   the   Scriptures   often,     / 
when  they  seemed  to  get  no  pleasurable  or  even  con-  J 
Dccted  ideas  from  "  Pilgrim's  Progress  "  or  from  "  liob- 
inson  Crusoe." 

V 


LECTURE    V. 

THE  TEXT  :    USES,  SOTJBCES. 

5th,  Continuing  the  discussion  of  the  positive  asea 
of  texts,  we  notice,  in  the  fifth  place,  that  a  text  aids 
in  the  introduction  of  a  subject  of  discourse. 

(1)  Upon  this  it  should  be  remarked,  that  the  pulpit 
without  texts  is  inferior  to  other  departments  of  public 
speaking  in  facilities  for  introduction  of  themes.  A 
speaker  before  a  legislative  body  has  a  theme  pre- 
announced  by  the  bill  or  the  resolution  before  the 
House.  A  speaker  at  the  bar  has  a  similar  aid.  Oc- 
casional speakers,  too,  have  assistance  in  the  introduc- 
tion of  their  themes,  in  the  fact  that  an  occasion  is 
usually,  in  some  sort,  a  preparative  to  an  audience  for 
the  kind  of  theme  and  of  discussion  which  are  becoming 
to  it.  But  a  preacher  has  no  such  facilities  in  any 
degree  proportioned  to  the  frequency  of  his  discourses. 
His  range  of  topics  is  almost  unlimited.  He  is  con- 
stantly addressing  one  audience.  His  hearers  can  have 
no  specific  preparation  of  mind  for  one  religious  themo 
rather  than  another,  until  he  creates  it.  The  danger  of 
formality,  or  of  sameness,  therefore,  in  his  approaches 
to  his  themes,  is  very  great,  unless  he  has  a  singularly 
inventive  mind.  Here  the  custom  of  preaching  from 
texts  comes  to  his  aid. 

(2)  Moreover,  the  brevity  of  a  sermon  renders  facility 

GO 


LECT.  v.j  THE   TEXT  :    USES.  61 

of  introduction  peculiarly  needful  in  preaching.  Usage 
rarely  tolerates  more  than  forty  minutes  to  a  sermon, 
generally  less  than  that.  Utility  certainly  requires  re- 
striction within  that  time.f  Whitefield  said  that  there 
were  no  conversions  after  the  first  half-hour.)  Yet  the 
subjects  of  the  pulpit  demand  time  for  discussion.  A 
preacher  often  wishes  that  he  could  have  the  three 
hours  of  a  lawyer  in  a  court-room ;  and  on  some  themes 
what  would  he  not  give  for  the  nine  hours  which 
Edmund  Burke  once  occupied,  or  for  the  four  whole 
days  which  he  filled  in  Westminster  Hall  at  the  trial 
of  Warren  Hastings?  The  preacher  has  no  time  for 
leisurely,  circumlocutory  approach  to  his  theme.     -Any 


thing  which  faciMates  brevity  of  preliminaries  is  valua- 
ble.    A  text  does  this. 

(3)  But  how  does  the  use  of  a  text  aid  in  the  ap- 
proach to  a  subject?  T  answer,  Often  a  text  is  the 
subject.  When  it  is  not  such,  it  may  suggest  material 
for  an  explanatory  approach  to  the  subject.  When  it 
needs  no  explanation,  it  may  suggest  the  best  material 
for  an  introduction  proper.  Remarks  not  explanatory 
of  the  text,  and  yet  suggested  directly  by  the  text,  may 
lead  to  the  theme  quickly,  and  in  a  way  which  shall 
stimulate  attention.  Again:  a  text  itself  maybe  such 
ds  to  awaken  interest  in  a  subject.  The  Rev.  Horace 
Bushnoll,  D.D.,  late  of  Hartford,  often  insured  the 
interest  of  an  audience  through  a  whole  discourse  bj 
Ihe  ingenuity  of  his  selection  of  a  text.  The  instant 
inquiry  of  a  hearer  was,  "  What  will  he  make  of  such 
a  text  as  that  ?  " 

6th,  A  sixth  use  of  a  text  is  to  promote  variety  in 
preaching.  Vinet  remarks,  that,  "  in  general,  a  text  is 
an  originality  ready-made." 

(1)  The  Bible  is  full  of  diversified  original  forms  of 


J^yJJ^^^C 


62  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lbct.  \ 

truth.  It  contains  every  variety  of  style  known  to  lit- 
erature. If  the  prime  object  of  the  biblical  revelation 
had  been  to  prepare  a  book  of  texts  for  the  pulpit,  a 
more  copious  variety  of  fresh  thought  could  hardly 
have  been  collected  in  any  other  form.  Let  a  preacher 
stamp  upon  his  ministry  the  biblical  impress  by  repre- 
sentative texts,  unfolded  by  sermons  which  are  true  to 
their  texts,  and  he  has  an  absolute  guaranty  of  a  sym^^ 
metrical  pulpit. 

(2)  This  leads  me  to  remark  that  inspired  thought 
often  presents  in  a  single  text^  orig^inal  combinations 
of  truth.  One  of  the  peculiarities  which  a  student  of 
biblical  texts  first  discovers  in  them  is  that  their  ideas 
do  not  seem  to  have  come  together  at  the  bidding  of 
science.  No  inspired  author  seems  to  have  aimed  at 
the  building  of  a  system  of  any  thing.  If  a  metaphysi- 
cal truth  is  stated,  it  seems  as  if  it  happened  to  be 
where  it  is :  perhaps  it  stands  side  by  side  with  a  gleam 
of  poetry.  Pure  intellect  and  pure  emotion  play  in 
and  out,  often,  in  the  structure  of  a  text,  with  the  art- 
lessness,  yet  without  the  incoherence,  of  dreams.  Pas- 
sages in  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  and  of  St.  Peter,  and 
in  the  visions  of  Isaiah,  remind  one  of  a  tropical  grove, 
so  free  is  the  growth  and  the  undergrowth  of  ideas, 
and  so  versatile  is  the  play  of  that  which,  in  any  other 
production,  we  should  call  genius.  It  is  a  sequence  of 
Uhis  characteristic  of  inspiration,  that  biblical  texts  fre- 
quently present  combinations  of  truth  which  are  full  of 
surprises.  A  single  text  will  often  be  a  picture  in  its 
combinations.  If  a  preacher  is  sensible  that  his  mind 
is  exhausting  itself,  and  that  he  is  falling  into  &  dull 
round  of  repetitions,  which  make  the  Sundays  like  the 
steps  of  a  treadmill  to  hun,  let  him  set  about  the  study 
of  the  Scriptures  more   earnestly;   let  him  study  hii 


LBCT.  v.]  THE  TEXT :    OSES.  63 

texts,  and  select  rich  texts,  and  then  preach  textual 
sermons  for  a  while.     It  will  make  a  new  man  of  him. 

(3)  This  suggests,  further,  that  the  usage  of  preach- 
ing from  texts  promotes  versatility  of  habit  in  a  preach- 
er's mental  culture.  If  mind  grows  by  what  it  feeds 
upon,  a  preacher's  mind  can  not  habituate  itself  to 
thinking  in  scriptural  lines  of  suggestion  without  ac- 
quiiing  some  degree  of  scriptural  versatility  in  its  own 
lines  of  thought.  What  it  originates  will  resemble  the 
stimulus  it  has  received.  ,  The  preacher's  sermons  will  4^ 
become  as  picturesque  as  his  texts  are.  ^> 

_  7th,  But  this  consideration  of  the  use  of  the  text  m  j 
promoting  variety  suggests  a  correlative  object  of  the 
custom :  it  is  to  aid  in  the  preservation  of  unity  in  a 
sermon.  It  is  true  that  many  texts  appear  to  be  hete- 
rogeneous in  material:  they  are  not  a  single  thesis. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  large  majority  of  texts  are 
logically  one  in  their  structure.  They  invite  a  strictly 
synthetic  discourse.  If  a  paragraph  of  a  chapter  does 
not,  a  single  verse  may:  if  a  verse  does  not,  a  portion 
of  it  may.  It  is  optional  with  the  preacher  to  select 
more  or  less  of  the  inspired  record.  A  multitude  of 
texts  give  a  preacher  no  opportunity  for  rambling 
remarks.  He  must  abandon  them  utterly,  if  he  wanders 
out  of  their  logical  range.  They  are  as  rigidly  one  as  a 
syllogism. 

But,  further  than  this,  many  texts  are  rhetorically 
one  which  are  not  logical  theses  in  form.  Vinet  says 
that  there  are  two  kinds  of  unity;  one  logical,  the 
other  psychological.  The  psychological  unity  is  the 
unity  of  soul  in  the  text  as  an  utterance  of  its  author, 
and  a  corresponding  unity  of  impression  on  tli6>  minds 
of  hearers.  A  multitude  of  apparently  heterogeneous 
texts  haie  this  psychological  unity.     The  text  —  " The 


i 


.Zl^A'-^      / 


64  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [leot.  v 

fruit  of  the  Spirit  is  love,  joy,  peace,  long-suffering 
gentleness,  goodness,  faith,  meekness,  temperance ; 
ascainst  such  there  is  no  law  "  —  is  intensely  one  in  the 
spirit  which  animates  it.  A  preacher  can  not  appro- 
priate into  his  own  mental  working  the  aim  of  that 
text,  and  yet  ramble  into  a  centrifugal  discourse  on 
lo^e,  and  on  joy,  and  on  peace,  as  themes  of  independ- 
ent discussion.  (There  is  an  aim  in  his  text  whicb 
steadies  his  aim  in  the  sermon.   ) 

This  suggestion  is  enhanced  in  significance  by  the 
fact  that  intensity  of  aim  is  characteristic  of  inspired 
thought.  Intensity  of  aim  is  singleness  of  aim.  An 
eager  mind  thinks  in  right  lines :  so  an  inspired  mind 
thinks  with  a  vigorous  tension  of  intellect,  and  always 
for  an  object.  Rambling  thought  is  the  work  of  an 
idle  mind.  The  Scriptures  have  none  of  it.  Hence 
paragraphs  of  inspired  thought  often  develop  the  point 
of  unity  when  a  verse  does  not.  A  chapter  may 
develop  the  point  of  unity  when  a  paragraph  may  seem 
to  have  none.  Even  in  those  passages  in  which  inspired 
emotion  overflows  into  seemingly  redundant  parenthe- 
ses, as  is  so  often  the  case  in  the  writings  of  St.  Paul, 
we  find,  after  all,  a  "  lucidus  ordo^''  which  threads  the 
whole.  The  intellectual  tension  which  is  incident  to 
the  inspired  state  often  gives  to  the  scriptural  style 
a  ring  which  reminds  one  of  the  twang  of  a  bow-string. 
Fidelity  to  the  spirit  of  texts  in  preaching,  then,  will 
secure  unity  of  aim  through  the  force  of  the  sympathy 
of  a  preacher's  mind  with  the  intensity  of  inspired 
tl: inking  and  feeling. 

To  these  views  of  the  point  before  us  is  to  be  added 
the  fact  that  any  collection  of  inspired  words  which 
have  neither  rhetorical  nor  logical  unity  is  not  a  text. 
It  call  not  be  woven  into  a  continuous  discourse.     For 


LECT.  v.]  THE  TEXT :   USES.  65 

example,  turn  to  the  first  three  verses  of  the  fourteenth 
chapter  of  Proverbs.  They  read  thus:  "Every  wise 
woman  buildeth  her  house;  but  the  foolish  plucketh 
it  down  with  her  hands.  He  that  walketh  in  his  upright- 
ness feareth  the  Lord;  but  he  that  is  perverse  in  his 
ways  despiseth  him.  In  the  mouth  of  the  foolish  is  a 
rod  of  pride ;  but  the  lips  of  the  wise  shall  preserve 
them."  Here  is  a  continuous  collection  of  biblical 
utterances;  but  they  are  not  a  text.  They  are  inde- 
pendent proverbs.  They  have  no  unity,  logical  or 
rhetorical.  They  were  not  intended  as  a  unit  of  thought 
by  the  inspired  writers.  No  sensible  preacher  would 
force  them  into  the  attitude  of  a  text. 

The  custom,  then,  of  preaching  from  texts  must  be 
regarded  as  always  tending  to  unity  of  discourse.  We 
have  no  occasion  to  apologize  for  textual  sermons,  as 
Mr.  Jay  docs.  Sermons  true  to  texts  will  have  as  real 
a  unity  as  sermons  on  a  logical  thesis.  Texts  will  invite 
unity  of  sermon,  and  to  a  good  preacher  will  necessi- 
tate it,  just  as  they  promote  variety.  Variety  in  unity, 
unity  in  variety :  this  is  nature,  and  this  is  the  rhetori- 
cafdrift  of  the  influence  of  texts. 

Such  are  the  most  important  of  the  uses  of  the  cus- 
tom we  are  considering,  and  of  the  objects  to  be  aimed 
at  in  the  selection  of  texts.  From  these  considerations 
it  is  obvious  that  the  selection  of  texts  is  of  vast 
moment  to  the  power  of  the  pulpit./  It  is  to  the  pulpit 
what  the  work  of  adjusting  the  range  of  guns  is  to  a 
battery.  A  false  range,  or  a  range  at  random,  is  equiv- 
alent to  none.  It  is  not  an  exaggerated  indication  ol 
the  importance  of  texts,  that  sometimes  a  text  itself  is 
the  occasion  of  the  conversion  of  a  soul.  This  occurred 
under  the  preaching  of  Whitefield.  In  powerful  re* 
rivals  it  is  no  uncommon  occurrence. 


) 


/ 


I 


V 


66  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [LECi?.  t 

/ 

The  study  of  texts,  also,  which  is  essential  to  intel- 
ligent selection,  is  of  itself  one  of  the  most  healthful 
moral  preparations  to  a  preacher's  mind  for  the  work  of 
constructing  a  sermon.  It  enriches  his  emotive  nature. 
The  tendency  of  it  is  to  subdue  unhallowed  emotions, 
and  to  bring  a  preacher,  as  a  messenger  of  God,  into 
sympathy  with  his  work  as  the  work  of  God.  Have 
we  not  all  learned  the  importance  of  cultivating  habits 
of  mental  intensity  in  our  religious  experience?  The 
most  perfect  example  of  such  intense  experience  that  we 
have  on  record,  next  to  the  life  of  our  Lord,  is  found  in 
the  working  of  inspired  minds.  That  is  a  most  wonder- 
ful law  of  inspiration  by  which  thought  direct  from  the 
mind  of  God  comes  to  us  in  solution  with  the  religious 
emotions  of  the  human  soul  chosen  for  its  utterance. 
It  comes  in  such  form,  that  often  you  can  not  separate 
the  divine  thought  from  the  human  feeling  which  em- 
bodies it.  The  moral  individuality  of  the  man  is  as  in- 
tense as  the  truth  which  is  communicated  throagh  him. 
Hence  we  are  never  sensible  of  distance,  or  of  conflict, 
between  the  intellect  and  the  heart  of  an  inspired 
writer.  His  intellect  is  never  chilly  :  his  heart  is  never 
empty. 

An  experience  closely  resembling  this  is  practicable 
to  every  preacher.  It  creates  the  perfection  of  preach- 
ing. The  prayerful  study  of  texts  is  one  of  the  direct 
means  of  acquiring  it.  I  think  that  preachers  of  earnest 
piety  are  more  frequently  sensible  of  intuitions  which 
seem  to  them  to  be  direct  from  the  Holy  Ghost  in  their 
selection  of  texts  than  in  any  other  portion  of  their 
preparation  for  the  pulpit.  Whitefield,  Summerfield, 
Edwards,  Payson,  —  all  of  them  recognized  such  hints 
from  the  Holy  Spirit  in  their  ministerial  experience  as 
i)f  frequent  recurrence.     In  many  less  celebrated   in« 


1-"* 


Vect.  v.]  the  text  :    SOURCES.  *        67 

stances  it  is  not  so  much  a  theme  which  unfolds  itself 
richly  to  the  m.nd,  as  it  is  the  suggestion  and  opening 
of  a  text,  —  often  sudden,  and  by  no  laws  of  association 
which  the  mind  can  detect.  You  will  be  sensible  of 
tliis  in  your  own  pastoral  experience,  if  you  are  eager 
biblical  students,  and  intensely  prayerful  men.  As  the 
rainbow  often  gives  a  reflection  of  itself,  so  the  promise 
of  Christ  to  his  disciples  will  seem  to  have  a  secondary 
fulfillment  in  your  life :  "  The  Holy  Ghost  shall  teach 
you  in  the  same  hour  what  ye  ought  to  say.  " 

If  the  business  of  selection,  then,  be  so  important  to 
the  management  of  texts,  it  may  seem  natural  to  pro- 
ceed to  lay  down  rules  of  selection.  But  we  experience 
a  difficulty  in  practice  as  soon  as  we  attempt  to  subject 
ourselves  very  rigidly  to  rules  on  a  subject  like  this. 
I  prefer  to  consider  the  principles  of  selection  under 
the  general  title  of  inquiries^  rather  than  rules^  respect- 
ing the  choice  of  texts.  This  is  the  precise  form  in 
which  the  subject  comes  before  a  pastor's  mind  practi- 
cally. It  is,  "  Shall  I  choose  this,  or  shall  I  choose  that, 
for  a  text  ?  "  With  very  few  exceptions,  principles  will 
require  diverse  applications  in  different  cases,  and  oar 
practice  will  often  overleap  them,  if  we  have  suffered 
them  to  stiffen  into  rules. 

IV.     The   most   important   inquiries   respecting  tlie  (pj 
selection  of  texts  group  themselves  naturally  into  four 
classes. 

1st,  The  first  of  these  classes  relate  to  the  sources 
of  texts. 

(1)  And   of  these,  the  first  is  the   query,  May  we   w//  j 
select  and  use  as  a  text  an  interpolated  passage,  or  a  -*^ 

mistranslation  ? 

In  reply,  it  should  be  observed  that  plausible  argu 
mental  ars  often  given  in  the  affirmative  of  the  question 


l^^fi}^^ 


-^TTJ     /i._   1  .  ^  ^V   *0  -   /-^  .    L«^>w«.#w« 


M^' 


^m. 


THE  THEOET  OP  PREACHING  [lect.  y      '•'VH, 

The  convenience  of  such  texts  is  frequently  urged  in  "^^'j 
defense  of  them.  The  text  (1  John  v.  7),  "There 
are  three  that  bear  record  in  heaven,"  is  a  very  con 
venient  proof-text  for  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  The 
passage  in  Prov.  viii.  17,  "Those  that  seek  me  eari}^^ 
shall  find  me,"  is  a  very  useful  text  for  a  sermon  on 
youthful  piety.  If  homiletic  reasons  alone  should 
control  our  usage,  we  should  deem  it  a  misfortune  to 
part  with  these  passages.  Yet  the  first  is  an  interpola- 
tion, and  the  second  is  a  mistranslation.  The  latitude 
adopted  by  opponents  of  evangelical  truth  in  their  use 
of  the  Scriptures  is  also  urged  in  vindication  of  such 
uncanonical  texts.  We  can  not  afford  to  be  scrupulous, 
it  is  said,  while  our  opponents  are  not  so.  The  failure 
of  audiences  to  detect  the  error,  if  we  use  these  texts, 
is  further  alleged  in  their  support.  Why  may  we  not 
use  their  ignorance  for  their  own  good?  Said  one 
preacher,  "In  using  this  ignorance  of  my  audience, 
I  am  only  doing  that  which  God  does  with  us  all.  The 
use  of  human  infirmity  to  the  extent  even  of  a  decep- 
tive silence  concerning  human  ignorance  is  a  principle 
very  largely  wrought  into  the  divine  administration  of 
this  world."  The  ostentation  of  correcting  the  accepted 
Bible  of  the  people  is  also  adduced  in  behalf  of  the 
largei  liberty  in  using  such  passages.  The  Bible  of 
the  people  is  the  English  version,  not  the  private 
though  unanimous  reading  of  the  schools. 

It  is  further  affirmed  that  evil  is  done  by  disturbing 
popular  associations  with  biblical  language.  The  Bible 
of  the  people,  again,  it  is  affirmed,  is  King  James's 
translation.  Their  faith  in  the  whole  may  be  impaired 
by  the  loss  of  their  faith  in  a  fraction.  The  reverent 
lady  who  declared  her  faith  in  the  narrative  of  Jonah, 
aying,  that,  if  the  Bible  had  said  that  Jonah  swallowed 


> 


^ECT.  v.]  THE  TEXT :    SOURCES.  69 

tlie  whale,  she  should  have  believed  it,  might  not  have 
borne  complacently  the  loss  of  the  celebrated  Trinita- 
rian interpolation  in  the  First  Epistle  of  St.  John.  We 
must  concede,  even  on  the  ground  of  the  largest  lib- 
erty, that  it  is  a  misfortune  that  Christian  scholarship 
has  lost  from  the  Bible  the  only  literal  declaration  it 
was  once  thought  to  contain  of  the  triune  existence  of 
the  Godhead.  Other  passages,  too,  are  so  enshrined  in 
the  reverent  associations  of  the  people,  that  the  loss  of 
them  would  be  like  the  loss  of  the  ancient  hymns  of  the 
Church.  So  strong  is  this  feeling,  —  prejudice,  if  so  you 
please  to  call  it,  —  th'at  Noah  Webster  and  his  success- 
ors, in  the  editing  of  his  dictionary,  though  revolution- 
izing the  orthography  of  every  other  kindred  word  in 
the  language,  did  not  venture  to  exclude  the^spelling 
of  the  word  "  Saviour "  with  the  "  u,"  as  they  should 
have  done  if  they  had  been  self-consistent.  They  have 
yielded  scholarship,  as  they  regard  it,  to  popular  rever- 
ence for  a  single  letter.  This  inherited  popular  feeling 
is  so  powerful,  that,  in  the  judgment  of  many,  if  the 
reverend  and  scholarly  authors  of  the  "  New  Version," 
now  in  progress,  should  decide  to  abandon  the  closing 
ascription  of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  the  Church  of  the  peo- 
ple probably  would  not  accept  the  scholastic  decision 
in  a  thousand  years.  Why,  then,  it  is  plausibly  asked, 
should  we  be  punctilious  about  a  few  uncancnica] 
texts  ? 

This  strain  of  reasoning  leads  us  to  observe  that 
some  concession  to  the  affirmative  of  this  question  is 
but  reasonable.  For  instance,  it  is  reasonable  that  a 
preacher  should  not  needlessly  obtrude  the  scholastic 
correction  of  these  passages  upon  an  audience.  We 
should  never  go  out  of  our  way  to  encounter  and 
rebuff  the  popular  faith  in  them :  we  may  be  justified 


70  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHlKa.  Tlbct.  v. 

in  going  out  of  our  way  to  avoid  such  an  encountei. 
A  profound  principle  was  that  of  our  Lord  respecting 
the  tares  and  the  wheat:  it  has  innumerable  varia- 
tions. Truth  bears  an  immense  amount  of  association 
with  error  with  less  evil  than  human  nature  suffers 
from  the  convulsions  necessary  to  a  rapid  rectification 
of  the  wrong.  Our  Saviour  was  an  adroit  preacher: 
he  knew  when  to  hold  his  peace.  So  may  we,  upon 
occasions,  let  these  questionable  texts  alone :  to  do  so 
is  no  violation  of  Christian  simplicity.  Further :  it  is 
obviously  reasonable,  that,  under  any  circumstances,  we 
should  not  commonly  choose  for  texts  passages  which 
need  correction.  So  much  is  to  be  conceded  to  the 
affirmative  of  the  question. 

But,  when  we  are  driven  to  face  the  question,  the 
negative  argument  is  conclusive ;  and  this  for  impera- 
tive reasons.  The  license  of  using  such  texts  without 
correction  injures  the  moral  and  mental  habits  of  a 
preacher.  Whatever  may  be  said  in  defense  of  it,  it 
does  involve  an  untruth.  It  imposes  upon  the  faith  of 
an  audience.  The  audience  will  never  know  it  ?  Per- 
haps so;  but  the  preacher  must  know  it,  and,  if  it 
injures  a  preacher's  moral  tone,  it  must  also  injure  his 
intellectual  habits.  Few  things  are  so  debilitating  to 
intellect  as  special  pleading.  No  man  can  afford,  as  a 
matter  of  mental  discipline,  to  tamper  with  his  own 
sense  of  truth. 
.  An  equally  conclusive  argument  against  the  use  of 
/  (liese  texts  is  the  hazard  to  a  preacher's  reputation.  It 
is  not  true  of  all  hearers  in  every  audience,  that  they 
will  not  detect  such  liberties  in  the  pulpit.  It  would 
not  be  safe  to  preach  to  any  audience  in  New  England 
on  the  text,  "There  are  three  that  bear  record  in 
heaven, '  without  disclasing  its  true  character.     If  the 


Litat.  r.j  TflE  TEXT :   SOtJUCES.  71 

majority  did  not  know  it,  an  individual  here  and  there 
would  know  it.  You  can  bear  a  weak  spot  in  youi 
reputation  as  a  scholar  at  any  other  point  more  secure- 
ly than  at  this  of  biblical  scholarship.  One  of  the 
ablest  laymen  in  Boston,  the  parishioner  of  one  of  the 
most  scholarly  pastors  of  New  England,  once  turned 
away  from  him  to  seek  direction  elsewhere  in  biblical 
studies,  because  he  had  lost  somewhat  of  his  faith  in 
his  pastor's  biblical  scholarship.  A  scholar  in  every 
thing  else,  he  was  not  a  scholar  in  this;  and  the  keen 
parishioner  had  found  it  out. 

A  third  reason  for  the  rejection  of  the  class  of  texts 
m  question  is  the  fact,  that,  in  an  enlarged  view,  it  is 
not  an  evil  that  popular  ignorance  of  the  English 
Scriptures  should  be  enlightened.  The  mind  of  the 
Spirit  is  the  Word,  and  nothing  else.  The  inspired 
record  is  the  Word,  and  no  other.  The  genuine  trans- 
lation is  the  Word,  and  nothing  different.  Cautiously 
and  reverently,  but  faithfully,  we  should  transfer,  if 
possible,  the  misplaced  reverence  of  the  people.  Let 
it  be  affixed  to  the  exact  word  of  God,  not  to  the  most 
useful  substitute ;  to  the  exact  word  of  God,  not  to  the 
interpolations  of  monks;  to  the  exact  word  of  God, 
not  to  the  wisdom  of  King  James's  translators.  Schol- 
arly commentators  have  reason  for  their  complaints 
of  the  pulpit  in  this  respect.  De  Wette  speaks  the 
feeling  of  all  candid  commentators,  in  saying  of  the 
German  pulpit,  "It  is  unpardonable  that  preachers 
adhere  purely  to  the  version  of  Luther,  so  often  faulty, 
especially  in  the  Old '  Testament ;  and  they  thus  preach 
upon  a  pretended  biblical  thought  which  is  found  no- 
where in  the  original." 

(2)  A  second  inquiry  of  the  class  now  before  us  is, 
May   we   .select   as   texts   passages   the    sentiment    of 


72  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  ^ 

which  is  not  inspired?  These  passages  are  of  three 
kinds.  One  consists  of  the  false  sayings  of  wicked 
beings.  The  record  is  inspired  of  the  sayings  of  Cain, 
Ahab,  Saul,  Herod,  Judas,  Satan.  A  second  consists 
of  false  sentiments  of  good  men.  The  complaints  of 
Job,  some  of  the  arguments  of  Job's  friends,  the  skep- 
tical reasonings  of  Koheleth,  are  specimens  of  these. 
The  third  class  consists  of  true  sentiments  uttered 
by  men  not  inspired.  The  historical  and  biographical 
parts  of  the  Bible  abound  with  such  passages. 

/  1        These  uninspired  passages  are  a  good  source  of  texts. 

^  A  good  source,  I  say ;  not  that  they  are  all  good  texts. 
They  constitute  a  large  portion  of  the  Scriptures. 
They  are  in  the  Bible  by  inspiration  of  record.  They 
therefore  hold  a  rank  which  an  interpolation  and  a 
mistranslation  do  not.  One  who  has  not  investigated 
the  matter  would  be  surprised  to  find  how  great  a  pro- 
portion of  the  Scriptures  is  inspired  only  in  record.  It 
is  largely  an  inspired  record  of  uninspired  sentiments. 
These  passages  are  a  ^ood  _so]ircje  of  texts  because  of 
the  intrinsic  value  of  the  truth  which  many  of  them 
contain.  "  Whojjan  forgive  sins  but  Gkid jonly  ?  "  was  a 
truth  uttered  by  men,  who,  in  the  same  breath,  charged 
our  Lord  with  blasphemy.  "  Never  man  spake  like^this 
gian"  was  a  truth  affirmed  by  men  who  had  just  re- 
turned from  an  attempt  to  arrest  him  for  his  destruc- 
tion. "  Almost  thou  persuadest  me  to  be  a  Christian  " 
was  said  byonelBefore  whom  an  Apostle  was  on  trial  for 
his  life.  " Lord,  I  bejieyej_hel£j^hou  mine  unbelief:" 
**Lord^  teach  nH-iiT^ay :  "  ''Lord^  to  whom  shall  we 
go?  Thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  life,"  —  these, 
and  a  multitude  like  them,  are  the  utterances  of  infirm 
minds  struggling  into  truth,  and  for  that  reason  may 
be  tlie  more  valuable  for  the  purpose  of  a  preacher. 


UDOT.  v.]  THE  TEXT :   SOUBCES.  73 

Again :  these  uninspired  passages  are  jaany  of  them 
confirmedJ)y  otherswHicTi  are  inspired.  Why  not  pre- 
fer those  inspired  passages  as  texts?  Because  those 
which  are  uninspired  except  in  record  may  have  rhe* 
torical  advantages  which  the  others  have  not.  "  Lord, 
I  believe ;  help  thou  mine  unbelief : "  compare  tliis 
with  the  text,  "  A  bruised  reed  shall  he  not  break." 
Might  not  the  first  of  these  be  preferable  as  the  text  of 
a  discourse  to  the  weak  in  faith  ?  Words  from  the  lips 
of  a  doubting  disciple  may  carry  more  weight  than 
even  inspired  words  addressed  to  such  a  disciple. 

Furthermore,  many  of  this  class  of  texts  are^valua- 
ble  specimens  of  the  working  of  uninspired  min<isr'^ 
Confirmation  of  inspired  truth  may  spring  from  unin- 
spired sources.  The  "  Meditations "  of  M.  Aurelius 
Antoninus  are  the  more  valuable  for  the  tacit  tribute 
which  Paganism  pays  in  them  to  the  spirit  of  Chris- 
tianity. "  I  know  thee,  who  thou  art,  the  Holy  One  of 
God,"  was  a  truth  exploded  by  conscience  from  the  lips 
of  a  demoniac  spirit ;  and  for  that  reason,  used  as  a 
text,  it  may  be  the  more  impressive.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  is  an  honor  to  the  truth  of  Revelation  to  see 
how  falsely  men  will  often  reason  for  the  want  of  it. 
The  theory  of  temporal  suffering  advanced  by  Job's 
three  friends  is  a  grand  text  to  illustrate  the  danger  of 
illogical  working  in  minds  devoid  of  divine  illumina- 
tion. 

Still  further :  the  class  of  passages  under  considera- 
tion contain  valuable_specimens  of_miregenerate  char- 
acter. "Let  us  eat,  and  drink;  for  to-morrow"  we 
die : "  where  shall  we  find  another  so  fit  a  text  for  a 
sermon  on  the  abuses  of  the  certainty  of  death  ?  Yet 
it  is  not  inspired,  and  it  is  false  in  sentiment.  Atheism 
is  concentrated  and  exploded  in  it.     What  would  the 


74  THE  THEORY  01?  PREACHIKG.  [LKcrr.  ▼ 

pulpit  do  without  the  text  from  the  troubled  conscience 
and  the  trembling  faith  of  Felix :  "  Go  thy  way  for  this 
time;  when  I  hjtve  a  convenient  season  I  will  call  for 
thee  "  ?  "  What  will  ye  give  me,  and  I  will  deliTer  him 
unto  you?"  —  where  is  to  be  found  another  so  apt  a 
text  for  a  sermon  on  the  truth  that  "  the  extreme._oi 
wickedness  is  the  extreme  of  meanness "  ?  Nothing 
else  discloses  the  theory  of  sin  like  examples  of  it  from 
real  life.  The  Scriptures  would  be  less  valuable  than 
they  are  for  homiletic  uses,  if  they  did  not  abound 
with  such  extracts  from  the  real  experiences  of  sin. 
Yet  they  are  inspired  records  of  uninspired  falsehoods. 
Certain  cautions,  however,  should  be  observed  in  the 
selection  of  texts  from  this  source.  One  is  that  we 
should  never  use  them  as  proof-texts  of  doctrine.  Job, 
Bildad,  Zophar,  Elihu,  Ahab,  Saul  are  no  authority  for 
revealed  truth.  They  often  contradict  each  other :  they 
commonly  contradict  the  direct  teaching  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  You  make  a  hazardous  concession  to  infidelity, 
if  you  use  such  texts  as  proof-texts.  We  must  employ 
this  whole  class  of  texts  for  just  what  they  are,  and  no 
more,  —  an  inspired  record  of  uninspired  beliefs. 
a/  A  second^  caution  is  that  we  should  not  give  to  this 
source  of  texts  an  undue  proportion  in  our  sermons. 
The  history  of  a  ministry  of  ten  years  might  surprise 
some  preachers  by  its  disclosure  of  a  disproportion 
between  inspired  record  and  inspired  sentiment  in  their 
preaching.  It  is  one  of  the  most  insidious  of  the  temp- 
tations of  this  world  that  sin  is  so  attractive  in  its 
forms  of  speech.  Wicked  men  are  very  apt  to  be  fas- 
cinating men.  Periods  in  history  occur  in  which  the 
moiit  charming  literature  is  infidel  literature.  The 
reading  public  of  England  ran  wild  over  the  produc- 
tions of  Byron,  Shelley,  and  Thomas  Moore,  when  their 


L«OT.  V.J  THE  TEXT :    SOtJBCES.  75 

Christian  contemporaries,  Wordsworth,  Co.eiidge,  and 
Southey,  could  scarcely  command  a  hearing.  The  press 
could  not  supply  the  demand  for  Lord  Byron's  "  Don 
Juan,"  while  Coleridge's  "  Christabel "  was  circulating 
in  manuscript.  Even  intrinsically  considered,  sin  is 
racy  in  its  utterances.  Not  only  do  its  sentiments 
please  depraved  minds;  but  its  style  is  apt  to  allure 
scholarly  minds,  and,  among  the  illiterate,  bright  minds. 
I'he  most  popular  wit  in  the  world  is  blasphemy.  To 
the  mass  of  men  the  most  forcible  style  is  profaneness. 
Nothing  else  is  so  sure  to  command  a  round  of  applause 
on  the  platform  as  an  oath. 

This  element  of  power  in  the  style  of  speech  adopted 
by  sin  runs  into  its  utterance  in   the   Scriptures.     If, 
therefore,  we  pay  no  heed  to  our  choice  of  texts,  we 
may  find  ourselves  unconsciously  attracted  by  the  raci- 
ness  of  sin  to  an  undue  proportion  in  our  choice  of  the 
sayings  of  wicked  men  and  even  of  other  wicked  beings. 
One  preacher  I  knew,  who  seemed  to  have  a  mania  for 
the  character  and  doings  and  words  of  Satan.     Preach- 
ing upon  them  was  to  him  a  safety-valve  through  which 
he  let  off  a  secret  accumulation  of  the  profane  impulse. 
Very  many  preachers  discourse  upon  the  biblical   ex- 
pressions and  illustrations  of  sin  more  frequently  than 
upon  the  utterances  and  examples  of  holiness.     Set  a 
watch  upon  this  peril  in  your  own  ministry.     Preach     I 
rathefon  holiness  than  on  sin ;  more  often  on  God  than     > 
on  maa;  on  the  rewards  of  piety  more  frequently  than    I 
on  the   doom  of  guilt;  and  choose  texts  accordingly.    ] 
Valuable  as  many  of  these  uninspired  passages  are,  the  -^ 
richest  texts  in  the  largest  profusion  will  be  found  to 
be  the  direct  expressions  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  ^^ 

A  thy;d  caution  respecting  the  passages  in  question       ^9/ 
is  that  generally,  when  they  are  employed  as  texts,  the 


76  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [leot.  v 

fact  should  be  named  that  they  are  not  from  inspired 
sources.  This  need  not  always  be  done  in  express 
terms :  something  may  be  said  which  implies  it.  It  need 
not  always  be  done  at  all.  Some  texts,  like  the  words 
of  Felix  to  St.  Paul,  would  never  be  mistaken  for  in- 
spired sentiments.  But  in  the  majority  of  cases  these 
passages  are  on  neutral  ground.  Their  sentiment  and 
structure  do  not  disclose  whether  Solomon  is  the 
author,  or  Zophar.  In  these  cases  the  text  should  not 
be  left  neutral  in  the  minds  of  hearers. 


LECTURE  VL 

THE  TEXT:   FORMS,   PERSPICUITY. 

2d,  The  second  class  of  inquiries  respecting  the^ 
selection  of  texts  relate  to  the  form  of  texts. 

(1)  Of  these  the  first  is,  Must  a  text  be  a  gram- 
matical sentence?  That  is,  must  its  grammatical 
structure  be  complete,  so  that  all  its  words  could  be 
parsed  ?  Good  taste  responds  "  Yes,"  as  the  general 
rule.  It  has  the  look  of  affectation  to  choose  for  a  text 
language  which  grammatically  considered  has  no  sense. 
"  Beginning  at  Jerusalem"  was  the  text  of  a  pastor  in 
Philadelphia.  Beginning  what?  who  begins?  what 
for  ?  what  of  it  ?  Imagine  the  announcement  of  such 
a  fragment  as  the  theme  of  a  secular  speaker  I  "  As  in 
Adam  all  die ;  —  "  why  retain  the  first  word,  which,  torn 
from  its  connections,  has  no  meaning?  Omit  the  first 
word,  and  have  you  not  the  more  tasteful  text  ?  It  is 
an  emphatic,  grammatically  finished  proposition.  "  Fas- 
tor  Harms"  hsLS,  published  a  sermon  on  the  text,  "A 
little  while."  Vinet  does  not  object  to  it.  But  I  ven- 
ture to  place  it  side  by  side  with  the  theme  of  another 
sermon  on  the  text  in  full,  by  a  preacher  in  Philadel- 
phia, and  let  each  speak  for  itself.  This  is  the  plan  of 
the  German  pastor:  "1.  These  words  are  cheering  to 
the  afQicted  —  "a  little  while ;  "  2.  They  maintain  joy 
in  joyful  hearts  —  "a  little  while;"     3.  They  arouse 

77. 


c/7  /^^. 


78  THE  THEOET  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  ti 


/ 


sluggishness  —  "a  little  wliile ; "  4.  They  disturb  care 
lessness  —  "a  little  while  ; "  5.  They  sustain  those  who 
are  combating  —  "a  little  while ; "  6.  They  strengthen 
the  dying  —  "a  little  while."  From  the  text  in  full, 
"  A  little  while  and  ye  shall  not  see  me,  and  again  a 
little  while  and  ye  shall  see  me,"  the  American  preacher 
presents  this  subject :  "  Some  of  the  lessons  to  be 
derived  from  the  absence  of  our  Lord  from  us,  and  its 
brief  duration."  By  the  side  of  this  what  becomes  of 
the  "  little  while  "  of  "  Pastor  Harms  "  ?  Imagine  St. 
Paul  on  Mars  Hill  as  sentimentalizing  on  "  a  little 
while  " ! 

Any  thing  can  be  caricatured;   the  best  things  the 

most  ludicrously.     Yet  only  by  caricature  can  we  pic- 

I        ture  to  the  life  this  method  of  dawdling  over  fragments 

\       of  inspired  words.     Imagine,  then,  a  full-grown  man, 

for  a   half-score   of   Sundays   in    succession,  quiddling 

\  over  the  following  texts,  all  of  them  inspired  fragments : 

^  *'  The  precious  ointment  that  ran  down  upon  the  beard, 

even  Aaron's  beard ;  "  "  Alexander  the  coppersmith ;  " 

k  "  Bowels  of  mercies ;  "  "  The  great  and  noble  Asnap-^'^^ 

^  per;"  "The  shaking   of  a   spear ;^" A   piece  of  the  (^ j 

nether   millstone ;  "    "  The   eyelids   of  the   morning ;  '/^y> 
^S      "The   little  owl  and  the  great  owl ; ^' Peter's  wife's 
mother  " ! 

But  exceptions  exist,  in  which  ungrammatical  texts 
are  admissible.  They  are  cases  in  which  the  fragments 
chosen  are  very  weighty  in  thought,  and  so  well  known, 
that  they  instantly  suggest  the  complete  idea.  Why 
do  we  say,  "The  greater  the  truth,  the  greater  the 
libel "  ?  Why  do  we  say,  "  Like  people,  like  priest ;  " 
"Waste  not,  want  not;"  "No  pains,  no  gains;" 
"  Handsome  is  that  handsome  does  "  ?  These  are  not 
grammatical   structures,  yet  good  taste  does  not  veto 

C  1 1  /irir    Hi  "Lf 


LKCT.  VI.]  THE  TEXT :    FORMS.  79 

their  proverbial  abbreviations.     Why?    Because  of  two 
elements  in  them,  —  their  pith   of  sentiment   and  the  I 
instantaneousness   with    which    they   are    understood.  \p 
The  thought  is  racy,  and  at  the  same  time  complete,  j 
thougli  the  form  is  not  complete.     Because  of  the  raci- 
ness,  it   is  pleasing  to  have  it  in  a  nutshell,  provided 
that  we  have  the  whole  of  it. 

On  the  same  principle  of  taste  we  are  pleased  with 
certain  exceptions  to  the  general  rule  against  fragmen- 
tary texts.     Certain  fragments  of  inspired  speech  are       // 
of  striking  significance,  and  at  the  same  time  so  well       ^  j 
known,  that  to  utter  them   is   to   suggest   to   hearers        y 
instantly  the  complete  idea.     Such  fractional  texts  are 
the   following :   "  The   glorious   gospel   of  the   blessed  i^^ 
God ; "  "  Without   God  in  the  world ;  "  "  Our  Father, 
which  art  in  heaven ;  "  "  The  precious  blood  of  Christ." 
These  are  good   texts,  because   of  their  very  striking    / 
significance  and  the  instantaneousness  with  which  they 
are   completely  understood.     Their   significance   alone     I    y 
would   not  justify  them ;   their   completeness   of  idea     ( 
alone  would  not ;  but  the  union  of  these  two  elements 
puts   them   into   the   same   category  with  abbreviated  J 
proverbs.     A   delicate   sense   of  propriety  will  enable 
a  preacher  to  distinguish  these  exceptions,  though  they 
are  somewhat  numerous.     The  number  of  these  excep- 
tions  suggests   a  caution,  that,  in  doubtful  cases,  the 
entire  passage  should  be  cited  with  a  repetition  of  the 
textual  fragment.     This  is  admissible  in  all  cases,  and 
required  in  some. 

(2)  k  second  inquiry  concerning  the  form  of  texts 
is,  Can  any  principle  regulate  the  length  of  texts  ? 
Ob^dously  no  rule  can  be  of  any  value  on  a  point  like 
this.  Yet  on  few  of  the  expedients  of  the  pulpit  do 
preachers  differ  more  widely.     hA  that  criticism   can 


^ 


80  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHINQ.  [lbctt.  vt 

wisely  say  of  it  is  contained  in  a  few  memoranda.  One 
is,  that  long  texts  have  advantages  which  are  sometimes 
conclusive  in  their  defense.  They  familiarize  the  peo- 
ple with  the  Bible.  The  Book  of  Common  Prayer  is 
justly  commended  on  the  ground  that  it  introduces  so 
much  of  inspired  language  into  the  routine  of  worship. 
Long  texts,  if  well  treated  by  elaborate  exposition,  effect 
the  same  object  more  instructively  than  the  mere 
rehearsal  of  the  Scriptures.  Moreover,  long  texts  pro- 
mote a  taste  for  exposition  among  the  people,  and 
invite  a  preacher  to  expository  discourse.  Prolonged 
texts,  furthermore,  are  the  more  accordant  with  the 
original  theory  of  the  text:  they  are  conservative  of 
the  ancient  reverence  for  the  inspired  utterances. 

But  a  second  memorandum  is,  that  short  texts  have 
advantages  which  should  sometimes  give  to  them  the 
preference.  They  are  more  easily  remembered  than 
long  texts.  A  brief  message  in  the  memory  is  of  more 
worth  than  a  long  one  in  the  ear.  Short  texts,  again, 
promote  unity  of  impression.  A  lengthy  text  is  apt 
to  have  some  redundant  materials  which  must  be  elimi- 
nated as  the  sermon  proceeds.  The  brief  text  more 
easUy  tallies  with  the  range  of  the  sermon.  Further, 
it  often  promotes  interest  of  introduction  by  the  omis- 
sion of  needless  exposition.  Indolent  composing  in  the 
introduction  frequently  takes  the  form  of  exposition 
irrelevant  to  the  aim  of  the  sermon.  Once  more :  the 
laconic  text  admits  of  emphatic  repetition  in  the  body 
of  the  sermon.  FacQity  of  repetition  in  the  use  of  a 
text  is  often  a  prime  element  in  the  force  of  a  conclu- 
sion. For  the  reasons  now  noted,  it  is  obvious  that 
the  only  rule  which  can  be  wisely  adopted  as  to  the 
length  of  a  text  is,  "  Fit  the  text  to  the  demands  of  the 
subject."     The  advantages  in  either  direction  are  only 


( 


user.  VI.]  THE  TEXT :   FORMS.  81 

secondary;  but  the  demands  of  the  s abject  are  always 
unperative.     They  will  necessitate  variety. 

But,  while  this  is  the  only  rule  which  criticism  can 
wisely  apply,  another  suggestion  is,  that  a  preacher's  n 
skill  in  the  homiletic  use  of  the  Scriptures  should  affect 
tlie  general  length  of  his  texts.  The  mere  heading  of 
a  sermon  with  a  dumb  block  of  biblical  words  is  inane ; 
not  so  the  skillful  handling  of  it  with  oratorical  genius. 
Plod  and  drone  over  a  text,  copying  lazily  from  your 
commentaries,  and  no  style  of  sermonizing  is  more  stale ; 
but  use  inspiration  in  the  spirit  of  an  orator,  speaking 
as  if  you  were  yourself  inspired,  and  your  preaching 
becomes  a  model  of  fascinating  speech.  A  clergyman, 
formerly  of  Brooklyn,  used  to  preach  upon  entire  chap- 
ters. He  had  trained  his  inventive  power  to  act  in 
devising  methods  of  making  the  Bible  interesting.  He 
had  at  command  an  inexhaustible  fund  of  biblical 
information.  In  his  sermons,  he  would  career  over  an 
entire  biblical  chapter  with  such  exhilarating  comment, 
that,  in  the  result,  he  carried  an  audience  with  him  to 
the  end  of  an  hour  without  a  moment  of  weariness.  . 
He  made  exegetical  learning  kindle  with  oratorical  fire.  / 
It  is  doubtful  whether  any  thing  else  than  his  taste  for 
scriptural  truth,  characters,  events,  idioms,  and  scenery 
could  have  saved  his  pulpit  from  being  overwhelmed 
by  the  irrelevant  materials  stored  in  his  polyglot  mem- 
ory. A  man  who  can  use  biblical  materials  thus,  with 
oratorical,  as  distinct  from  merely  exegetical,  skill, 
may  safely  indulge  in  the  use  of  long  texts.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  most  lifeless  preaching  possible,  and 
therefore  in  spirit  the  most  unscriptural  preaching,  ia 
that  which  is  made  up  of  commonplaces,  drawn  from 
concordance  and  commentary,  on  a  conglomeration  oi 
biblical  words. 


82  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  vi 

(3)  A  third  inquiry  concerning  the  form  of  texts  is, 
May  we  choose  for  one  sermon  more  than  one  text  ? 
The  leading  principle  which  decides  this  question  is  the 
same  with  that  which  regulates  the  length  of  the  text,  — 
fit  the  text  to  the  subject  and  its  discussion.  This,  how- 
ever, will  of  necessity  require  that  we  generally  adopt 
but  one  text.  We  should  never  choose  more  than  one 
text,  without  an  obvious  demand  for  it  in  the  nature 
of  the  theme,  or  of  its  discussion.  What  constitutes 
an  obvious  demand  ?  It  must  be  some  departure  from 
singleness  in  the  subject.  Two  or  more  texts  should  not 
be  chosen  merely  for  the  purpose  of  dignifying  a  subject 
by  an  accumulation  of  inspired  statements  of  it.  The 
text  is  not  the  proper  place  for  this.  If  the  subject  be 
one,  the  text  should  be  one.  Neither  should  two  or 
more  texts  be  announced  for  the  sake  of  discussing  two 
or  more  independent  subjects  in  one  sermon.  No  such 
discussions  of  independent  subjects  are  permissible  in 
one  sermon.     The  law  of  unity  forbids  them. 

Two  or  more  texts  may  properly  be  chosen  for  a  sub- 
ject which  is  twofold,  or  manifold,  and  for  which  no 
single  text  can  be  found  which  covers  its  whole  range. 
The  late  Professor  Hitchcock  of  Amherst  discussed 
before  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts,  in  1850,  the 
mutual  dependence  of  liberty,  education,  and  religion. 
The  subject  was  single,  yet  threefold :  no  correspond- 
ing threefold  text  in  the  Bible  exactly  expresses  or 
suggests  that  threefold  theme.  Therefore  the  preacher 
properly  announced  three  texts,  —  one  for  each  of  the 
leading  topics  of  the  sermon.  On  the  same  principle, 
double  texts  are  often  appropriate  to  the  discussion 
of  related  truths.  Certain  biblical  doctrines  lie  over 
against  each  other.  They  are  opposites  without  being 
contradictories.     If  no  single  text  suggests  such  a  brace 


LKCT.  vi.]  THE  TEXT:    FORMS.     *-J7/^  83**,^  ^ 

of  truths,  two  may  be  chosen  to  introduce  them.     Thus    ,^^*^ 
Professor  Shedd,  in  a  discourse  designed  to  reconcile      ^   X 
the  benevolence  with  the  justice  of  God,  announced  the      -^.^ 
double  text :  "  God  is  love,"  and  "  God  is  a  consuming 
fire."     A  reconciliation  of  the  theories  of  St.  Paul  and 
St.  James  on  justification  may  require  two  texts.     The 
Rev.  Bishop  Huntington,  preaching  upon  "  The  cross  as  #, 
a  burden  and  a  glory,"  selected  these  two  texts  :  "  They        ^  <  ^ 
found  a  man  of  Gyrene,  Simon  by  name,  him  they  com- 
pelled to  bear  his  cross,"  and  "  God  forbid  that  I  should 
glory  save  in  the  cross  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 

The  two  dispensations  of  the   Old  and  New  Testa-     ^ 
ments   furnish   a   class  of  themes  which  may  require     ^ 
double  texts.     Revelation  as    a  whole  derives  a  dual 
structure  from  this  feature  in  its  history.     The  views 
of  Job  and  of  St.  Paul  on  the  immortality  of  the  soul ; 
the   Mosaic  and  the  Christian  laws  of  the  Sabbath ; 
the  Mosaic  and  the  Christian  theories  of  marriage  ;  the 
Mosaic  and  the  Christian  theories  of  human  servitude  ; 
the   Ten  Commandments,  and  their  summary  in  the  %  ^ 
Christian  law  of  love  ;  the  imprecatory  Psalms,  and  the       *  *"  • 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  —  these  are  examples  of  subjects 
properly  treated  by  mutual  comparison,  each  couple  in  ,  ^ 

one  sermon,  with  two  texts.  In  all  the  cases  in  which 
double  texts  are  allowed,  you  will  perceive  that  the 
principle  of  selection  is  simply  that  of  necessity.  It  is 
very  different  from  that  by  which  a  preacher  chooses 
liouble  texts  to  intensify  the  biblical  authority  for  a 
theme,  or  to  discuss  independent  themes,  or  to  affect  a 
homiletic  singularity.  f% 

3d,  The  third  class  of  inquiries  concern  the  impies-      ^ 
sion  of  texts  upon  the  audience.     In  the  very  concep-    ^ 
tion  of  it  a  text  is  a  rhetorical  expedient:    it  is  nc 
essential  part  of  discourse  considered  as  such.    Aristotla 


54  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  V£ 

koew  nothing  of  it.  We  employ  it  as  an  oratoricai 
device  for  certain  advantages,  most  of  which  consist 
in  the  direct  impression  of  the  text  upon  the  audience. 
Therefore  this  impression  gives  rise  to  a  significant 
,      j    xlass  of  inquiries. 

[I    /*\M(1)  Of  these  the  first  is,  Should  a  preacher  restrict 
ij^l^his  choice  to  perspicuous  texts?   "What  shall  a  man 
/»T'      give  in  exchange  for  his  soul?"   "Turn  je,  turn  ye, 
'  from  your  evil  ways,  for  why  will  ye  die  ?  "  "  Seek  ye 

the  Lord  while  he  may  be  found:"  "By  their  fruits 
ye  shall  know  them  :  "  "  Repent  ye,  for  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  is  at  hand  :  "  "  Grow  in  grace  :  "  "  By  grace  are 
ye  saved  through  faith,"  —  such  passages,  together  with 
the  narrative  parts  of  the  Bible,  the  parables,  the  Lord's 
Prayer,  the  Ten  Commandments,  and  the  devotional 
Psalms,  represent  the  staple  of  texts  in  the  ministra- 
tions of  many  preachers.  Is  it  wise  to  confine  the 
pulpit  to  so  narrow  a  range  of  choice  ?  Is  it  desirable 
to  give  to  suet  passages,  even  an  ascendency  in  one's 
f\^^ range  of  selection? 

W/n^       In  answer  we  should  defend  the  affirmative,  if  we 
U  .^    were  prescribing  for  an  itinerant  ministry ;  for  perspicu- 
p^     ^  ous  texts  have  some  very  positive  advantages.     Such 
V         texts  are  immediately  suggestive  of  the_jubie^ts  de- 
JW  I        rived  from  them.     Otten  it  is  desirable  that  a  theme 
^  I        should  disclose  itself  to  hearers  instantaneously :  there- 
fore   it  is  judicious  to  choose  a  text  which  needs  no 
comment.     Often  suspense  is  the  very  thing  which  we 
wish  to  retrench :  therefore  we  take  a  clear  text,  that 
^        the  hearer  may  not  be  held  aloof  from  the  theme  by 
,     the  interpolation  of  expository  preliminaries.     An  oc- 
casion is  sometimes  such  as  to  indispose  an  audience  to 
such  preliminaries.     A  wise  preacher  in  Connecticut, 
after  the  death  of  a  young  person  by  a  shocking  calam- 


LKCT.  VI.]  THE  TEXT :    PERSPICUITY.  SA 

ity,  at  one  stroke  took  command  of  the  wrought-up 
feelings  of  his  hearers  by  announcing  as  his  text  the 
words,  "  It  is  I :  be  not  afraid."  Make  a  subject  thus 
chime  in,  if  possible,  with  the  mood  of  an  audience 
instead  of  plodding  through  an  explanation  of  an  ob 
scure  text,  before  you  can  reach  a  subject. 

Again :  a  perspicuous  text  may  facilitate  a  long  and 
intricate  discussion.  It  may  save  time  for  such  a  dis- 
cussion. We  must  watch  for  all  fair  expedients  foi 
shortening  preliminaries.  Ten  minutes  saved  by  the 
absence  of  an  expository  introduction  to  a  sermon 
may  save  the  whole  force  of  it  in  its  final  impression 
upon  the  hearers.  On  those  economized  minutes  may 
depend  the  question  whether  the  conclusion  shall  fall 
upon  interested  or  upon  jaded  sensibilities.  A  clear 
text  saves,  also,  not  only  time,  but  the  intellectual 
strength  of  an  audience  for  a  difficult  discussion.  If 
a  subject  must  task  the  hearer's  power  of  attention  or 
abstraction,  an  adroit  preacher  will  not  exhaust  that 
power  by  a  needless  expenditure  of  it  upon  the  text. 
The  tactics  of  military  skill  are  the  true  strategy  of 
the  pulpit.  Concentrate  the  mental  resources  of  an 
audience  where  they  are  most  imperatively  demanded. 
Reserve  fresh  force  for  the  critical  juncture  of  the 
discussion. 

Moreover,  a  transparent  text  assists  the  illiterate  part 
of  an  audience  in  the  comprehension  and  recollection '  / 
of  the  sermon.  A  text  plainly  expressive  of  the  theme 
helps  an  untrained  mind  to  the  understanding  of  much 
which  is  not  transparent.  If  an  invalid  hearer  losea 
some  part  of  the  discourse,  a  perspicuous^  text  may 
assist  him  to  rejoin  the  train  of  thought.  ^  It  is  like  a 
beacon  to  one  who  has  lost  his  way.  J  Such  a  text,  also, 
very  obviously  assists  the  memory  of  such  a  hearer 


/V 


86  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect    ti 

The  remembrance  of  the  entire  sermon  will  often  de- 
pend on  the  simplicity  of  the  text.  This  suggests,  fnr 
ther,  that  a  plain  text  may  predispose  many  to  listen  to 
the  sermon  founded  upon  it.  You  will  often  detect  a 
hearer  deliberately  composing  himself  to  sleep  when  he 
sees  the  prospect  of  an  elaborate  discussion.  A  wise 
tactician  in  the  strategy  of  the  pulpit  will  catch  such 
imbecile  listeners,  if  need  be,  with  guile.  Do  not 
indulge  them  with  a  dark  text  suggestive  of  another 
indulgence  of  darkness.  I  have  known  one  preacher, 
who,  in  preaching  to  an  audience  which  was  unusually 
demonstrative  in  its  religious  emotions,  would  always 
choose  a  sermon  which  had  an  impassioned  text.  His 
text  for  one  such  audience  was,  "  Howl  ye  ;  for  the  day 
of  the  Lord  is  at  hand."  VYou  will  find  yourselves 
driven  by  pastoral  fidelity  to  invent  expedients  for 
breaking  up  habits  of  somnolence  in  a  certain  class  of 
hearers. )  By  a  law  of  our  nature  we  grow  fond  of  ano- 
dynes to  which  we  become  habituated.  May  not  this 
account  for  the  attachment  of  certain  attendants  upon 
the  worship  of  the  sanctuary  to  pastors  whose  sermons 
they  certainly  do  not  hear  ?  A  faithful  preacher  will 
deem  nothing  beneath  his  care  which  may  predispose 
infirm  minds  to  listen  to  his  discourses. 

Still  another  advantage  of  a  clear  text  is  that  it 
brings  biblical  authority  to  the  front  at  the  outset  of  a 
discussion.  This  supreme  object  of  a  text  is  acliieved 
most  readily  by  one  which  is  easily  understood.  Texts 
which  unequivocally  affirm  unwelcome  doctrines  may 
sometimes  be  made  to  capture  a  hearer's  convictions  or 
sensibilities  before  prejudice  has  time  to  rally.  A  plain 
declaration  of  God's  word  forbids  cavil.  An  adroit 
preacher  will  thus  forestall  cavil,  at  times,  by  blocking 
lis  way  with  such  a  text.     "  My  text  is  found  in  Mark 


i 


^ 


LECT.  VI.]  THE  TEXT :    PERSPICUITY.  87 

xiv.  21 :  '  Good  were  it  for  that  man  if  he  had  never 
been  born.'  Who,  then,  can  believe  that  Judas  has 
been  in  heaven  these  eighteen  hundred  years  ?  "  —  such 
were  the  text  and  introduction  of  a  certain  discourse 
on  the  future  punishment  of  the  wicked. 

Such  advantages  as  these  have  been  the  inducement 
to  some  homiletic  writers  to  advise  the  selection  of  trans* 
parent  texts  only.  Probably  the  same  reason  led  t  :>  the 
adoption,  by  the  Fathers,  of  the  mpiaonij  of  texts,  and  y  — 
to  the  restriction  of  the  range  of  choice  in  some  of  the  f\jL^^ 
Reformed  churches  to  the  scriptural  lesson  for  the  day.  ^^  .  * 
But  such  limitations  presuppose  a  low  state  of  culture  ^^^I? 
in  the  popular  mind.  For  the  necessities  created  by 
the  advanced  culture  of  our  own  times,  obscure  texts 
have  advantages  which  often  offset  those  of  perspicu- 
ous texts.  The  discussion  of  an  obscure  text,  if  well 
constructed,  promotes  popular  knowledge  of  the  Scrips 
tures.  An  obscure  text  understood  is  so  much  added 
to  the  common  stock  of  biblical  information.  If  we 
always  avoid  such  passages,  out  of  regard  to  the  wants 
of  infirm  hearers,  one  of  the  objects  of  having  a  text 
is  lost.  Some  persons  in  every  congregation  are  not 
students.  They  do  not  read  commentaries.  Their 
reading  of  the  Scriptures  is  not  very  intelligent. 
Their  daily  devotional  reading  of  the  Bible  is  largely 
routine :  they  estimate  its  value,  often,  by  the  quantity 
read,  rather  than  by  the  thoughts  appropriated.  For 
solid  growth  in  scriptural  knowledge  they  depend  upon 
the  ministrations  of  the  pulpit.  A  considerate  pastor 
will  care  for  this  class  of  souls  by  often  choosing  texts, 
which,  when  explained,  will  be  some  addition  to  their 
scriptural  ideas.  After  many  days,  you  may  find  the 
bread  you  have  thus  cast  upon  the  waters  in  the  good 
service  which  such  a  text  performs  in  the  meditation)! 


88  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [user,  vi 

of  a  Christian  on  his  death-bed.  Other  things  being 
equal,  therefore,  an  obscure  text  is  preferable  to  a  per- 
spicuous one  in  a  stationary  ministry,  for  the  opportu* 
nity  it  gives  for  enlarging  the  range  of  biblical  thought 
in  the  experience  of  many  hearers.  On  this  ground 
Bishop  Horsley  advocated  and  sustained  by  his  own 
practice  the  frequent  selection  of  difficult  texts.  In  his 
pulpit  he  thus  put  himself  at  the  head  of  a  Bible  class. 
Again;  an  obscure  text  often  facilitatesagradual 


I 


approach.to_thesubject  of  a  discourse.  Is  it  an  argu- 
ment for  a  plain  text  that  it  discloses  the  subject  at 
once  ?  True ;  but  sometimes  it  is  not  desirable  to  dis- 
close the  subject  at  once.  A  prudent  speaker  will 
sometimes  count  it  a  misfortune  to  have  the  subject 
foreseen  at  a  glance  by  its  reflection  from  the  text.  If 
sometimes  it  is  wise  to  overawe  cavil  by  a  biblical 
command  to  accept  an  obnoxious  doctrine,  at  other 
times  it  may  be  wiser  to  conceal  the  obnoxious  doctrine 
till  certain  prefatory  remarks  have  quickened  the  inter- 
est of  a  hearer  in  it.  In  such  a  case  a  text  which  by 
its  transparency  tells  the  whole  story  defeats  itself. 
The  text,  "He  hath  mercy  on  whom  he  will  have 
mercy,  and  whom  he  will  he  hardeneth,"  leaves  a 
preacher  no  leeway  for  suspense  in  announcing  the 
theme  of  "The  Decrees  of  God."  But  Dr.  Emmons 
approaches  a  branch  of  that  subject  more  ingeniously 
from  the  text,  "  Except  these  abide  in  the  ship,  ye  can 
not  be  saved."  The  text,  "  The  wicked  shall  be  turned 
into  hell,"  gives  inevitable  foresight  of  what  the  subject 
is  to  be.  But  the  same  subject  might  be  derived  legiti- 
mately, yet  gradually,  from  the  parable  of  the  house 
built  on  the  sand.  In  the  choice  of  a  text,  we  must 
often  strike  the  balance  between  opposing  advantages. 
The  same  weiglits  are  not  always  in  the  same  scale. 


(i 


LEOT.  VI.]  THE  TEXT :    PERSPICUITY.  89 

Further:  an  obscure  text  tends  to  interest  the  more 
cultivated  hearers.  If  invalid  minds  may  be  benefited 
by  facile  texts,  robust  minds  are  on  the  alert  for  an 
object  of  intellectual  interest.  Such  minds  will  grapple 
with  a  difficult  discussion,  will  be  attracted  by  a  dif- 
ficult text.  One  of  the  practical  perplexities  of  preach- 
ing on  the  text,  "  What  shall  a  man  give  in  exchange 
for  his  soul  ?  "  is  the  intellectual  disappointment  which 
thoughtful  hearers  feel  at  the  announcement  of  that 
which  promises  them  no  intellectual  refreshment.  Have 
you  not  been  sensible  of  this  in  listening  to  sermons 
upon  that  passage  ?  It  is  one  of  the  most  difficult  texts 
in  the  Bible  on  which  to  construct  an  interesting  dis- 
course. -^ 

This  suggests  that  an  obscure  text  furnishes  a  fa-  Ty/  J 
vorable  mode  of  training  to  reflective  habits  the  le&U  ^  / 
cultivated  hearers.  A  certain  class  of  hearers  are  un- 
reflecting, not  from  mental  weakness,  but  from  want  of 
culture.  One  of  the  multifarious  aims  of  a  preacher 
should  be  to  elevate  this  class  of  minds.  The  pulpit  is 
the  cliief  educating  power  to  them.  Yet  they  need 
a  considerate  pulpit.  Specially  do  they  require  a  train- 
ing which  shall  associate  genially  their  intellectual 
aspirations  with  their  religious  emotions.  In  practical 
life  pastors  are  embarrassed  by  the  antagonism  whicli 
exists,  in  the  popular  convictions,  between  intellect  and 
piety.  You  will  soon  encounter  this  antagonism  in 
some  form.  You  will  find  the  presumption  lurking  in 
the  minds  of  some  of  your  most  excellent  hearers  that 
a  very  intellectual  thing  can  not  be  a  very  religious 
thing.  It  is  a  pernicious  error :  few  to  which  the  pop- 
ular mind  is  exposed  are  more  so.  Yet  you  will  never 
succeed  in  removing  it,  except  by  elevating  such  niindi 
to  a  higher  level  of  culture. 


7 


^, 


90  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHINQ.  [lect.  vi 

One  method  of  induciDg  this  state  of  improved  cul- 
ture is  to  take  advantage  of  the  reverence  of  your 
hearers  for  the  word  of  God,  their  awe  in  view  of  its 
mysteries,  their  faith  in  the  value  of  its  unexplained 
obscurities,  and  their  consequent  desire  to  know  more 
of  its  meaning.  Take  advantage  of  the  assemblage  of 
moral  feelings  which  gather  around  the  Bible,  and  make 
them  tributary  to  the  intellectual  training  necessary 
to  the  understanding  of  the  Bible.  Preach,  therefore, 
often  on  obscure  texts.  One  thing  which  has  sustained 
theological  thinking  among  the  common  people  of  Scot- 
land is  the  taste  for  elaborate  and  argumentative  expo- 
sition, which  has  been  cultivated  by  the  Scottish  pulpit. 
A  profound  principle  of  tactics  in  the  education  of  a 
people  by  the  pulpit  is  contained  in  this  advance  of  in 
tellectual  culture  in  alliance  with  the  moral  affections. 

Such  are  some  of  the  advantages  of  obscure  texts. 
A  pulpit  which  recognizes  progress  in  the  education  of 
the  masses,  and  therefore  aims  to  keep  itself  at  such  a 
height  that  it  can  be  an  educating  power  to  the  masses, 

ust  admit  discussions  of  the  obscurities  of  revelation. 
Yet  such  discussion  may  be  abused.  Therefore  it  is 
desirable  to  observe  certain  cautions  respecting  the 
choice  of  obscure  texts. 

One  caution  is  that  we  should  not  choose  an  obscure 
text  unless  we  are  confident  that  we  can  make  it  plain. 
Not  only  should  we  ourselves  understand  it,  l)ut  we 
should  be  able  to  make  our  audience  understand  it.  A 
positive  evil  is  done,  iJp  we  drag  into  view  a  scriptural 
obscurity,  and,  after  a  bungling  exposition,  leave  it  as 
we  found  it.  Another  caution  is  that  we  should  not 
select  a  dark  text,  when  to  make  it  nitelligible  would 
require  a  disproportionate  amount  of  the  time  allotted 
to  the  sermon.     A  discussion  of  a  theme  should  not  be 


i^KCT.  n.]  THE  TEXT :    PERSPICUITY,  91 

cramped  in  order  to  unfold  an  unmanageable  text.  A 
third  caution  is,  that  we  should  not  choose  a  very  ob- 
scure text  for  a  very  simple  subject.  Some  passages 
when  explained  are  reduced  to  an  exceedingly  simple 
meaning,  yet  the  process  of  explanation  is  difficult 
and  prolonged.  Many  of  the  most  valuable  religious 
sentiments  of  the  Old  Testament  are  but  hints  of  the 
same  sentiments  recorded  more  luminously  in  the  New 
Testament.  To  evolve  them  from  the  texts  of  the  Old 
Testament  may  be  a  laborious  process,  yet  some  sim- 
ple texts  of  the  New  Testament  may  have  rendered 
them  familiar  to  hearers  of  to-day.  A  text  is  never 
designed  for  a  display  of  ingenuity  in  extorting  a  senti- 
ment from  it.  The  text  is  made  for  the  subject,  not 
the  subject  for  the  text. 

A  fourth  caution  is,  that  we  should  not  choose  ob- 
scure texts  in  such  proportion  as  to  misrepresent  the 
simplicity  of  the  Scriptures.  Some  preachers  have  a 
mania  foi  exposition.  A  difficult  text  is  a  treasure  to 
them,  of  value  proportioned  to  its  obscurity.  Arch- 
bishop Whately,  if  one  may  judge  from  his  published 
sermons,  was  inclined  to  a  disproportioned  treatment 
of  the  difficulties  of  the  Bible.  It  is  not  wise  to  be 
eager  to  array  these  before  the  people  from  the  pulpit. 

I  consider  thus  at  length  the  question  of  perspicuous 
and  obscure  texts,  because  it  is  fundamental  to  the 
whole  subject  of  the  degree  of  intellectuality  which 
should  be  cultivated  in  the  pulpit.  We  need  to  corn^ct 
those  traditions  of  the  pulpit  respecting  it  which  do 
not  recognize  progress  in  popular  intelligence  ;  and  3  et 
no  sweeping  principles  can  be  safely  adopted  against 
them.  A  certain  average  of  regard  for  conflicting 
interests  must  be  aimed  at,  and  this  may  not  be  the 
&ame  in  the  experience  of  any  two  pastors. 


^    *        7     w  ^  /    'i  /        /  IT 


LECTURE  VII. 

THE  TEXT:   EMOTION,   DIGNITY,   NOVELTY,   PERSON- 
ALITY. 

(2)  The  second  inquiry  which  concerns  the  impres- 
Bion  of  texts  upon  an  audience  is,  Ought  we  to  select 
texts  of  plAvgi;f>d  ep^<^^'ional  character?  These  have 
been  termed  by  homiletic  writers  "promising  texts." 
It  was  an  ancient  homiletic  rule  that  such  texts  should 
not  be  chosen.  The  aim  of  the  rule  was  to  insure  sim- 
plicity in  all  the  labors  of  the  pulpit.  Care  to  make 
preaching  elementary  has  been  the  burden  of  a  vast 
amount  of  homiletic  advice. 

In  sympathy  with  this  view  it  must  be  conceded  that 
serious  difficulties  attend  the  management  of  emotional 
texts.  One  of  these  is  the  obvious  danger  of  exciting 
expectations  which  the  sermon  will  disappoint.  Take, 
for  example,  such  passages  as  the  following :  "  Jesus 
cried  with  a  loud  voice,  saying,  Eli,  Eli,  lama  sabach- 
thani :  "  "  O  death,  where  is  thy  sting  ?  O  grave, 
where  is  thy  victory  ?  "  "  They  rest  not  day  and  nighty 
saying.  Holy,  holy,  holy.  Lord  God  Almighty,  which 
was,  and  is,  and  is  to  come."  These  passages  a 
preacher  can  not  read  appropriately  without  the  sug- 
gestion of  sublime  emotions.  An  audience  may  natu- 
rally anticipate  from  them  splendid  discourses.  The 
grand  text  needs  to  be  buoyed  up  by  a  grand  sermon 

92 


LECT.  vn.]  THE  TEXT :    EMOIION.  9^ 

Will  any  sermon  equal  such  texts  ?  This  difficulty  is 
aggravated  by  the  incongruity  between  an  impassioned 
text  and  the  quiescent  state  of  an  audience  when  the 
text  is  announced.  Hearers  are  generally  unexcited 
when  a  preacher  rises  to  utter  his  text.  Such  passages 
as  we  are  considering  come  upon  them  suddenly.  The 
transition  is  abrupt.  Can  even  inspired  passion  ccm- 
raand  instantaneous  sympathy  ? 

Another  difficulty  of  such  texts  is,  that  they  invite 
a  preacher  into  an  impassioned  introduction.  The  ten- 
dency is  to  produce  a  strain  to  lift  the  introduction  to 
the  level  of  the  text.  Therefore  eloquent  description, 
or  impassioned  appeal,  or  richly-wrought  imagery  may 
be  thrust  into  the  preliminary  portions  of  a  sermon, 
where  such  composition  is  very  rarely  natural.  So 
much  the  more  prodigious,  then,  is  the  labor  devolving 
upon  the  preacher  of  sustaining  such  an  impression  by 
a  corresponding  splendor  in  the  sermon.  If  a  man 
begins  with  the  sunrise,  he  must  rise  to  the  meridian. 

And  this  suggests  the  danger  of  bombast  in  a  futile 
attempt  to  equal  promising  texts.  Some  passages  of 
the  Scriptures  no  uninspired  mind  can  imitate.  No 
preacher  can  describe  the  New  Jerusalem  as  St.  John 
has  described  it.  Preachers  become  turgid  when  they 
imitate  the  old  prophets  in  denunciatory  discourse. 
They  appear  effeminate  when  they  struggle  to  copy  the 
beauty  or  the  pathos  of  certain  biblical  appeals.  Tliey 
still  more  frequently  make  the  pulpit  ridiculous  by  pr^ 
longing  and  improving  upon  scriptual  imagery. 

These  are  real  difficulties  in  the  treatment  of  such 
texts.  Yet  it  must  be  said,  on  the  other  hand,  that 
promising  texts  can  not  always  be  dispensed  with. 
One  reason  is  that  they  form  the  most  significant  por- 
tions of  God's  word.     Are  we  never  to  preach  upon  the 


il 


94  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  vtt. 

biblical  deiicriptions  of  the  judgment,  of  heaven,  of 
hell  ?  Moreover,  some  subjects  are  not  congenial  with 
an  unpretending  text.  Some  of  the  themes  of  the 
pulpit  are  intrinsically  grand,  awful,  overpowering: 
others  are  plaintive,  beautiful,  exquisite.  These  quali- 
ties are  ingrained  in  the  subjects.  The  one  class,  ii 
presented  becomingly,  must  be  discussed  in  bold,  im- 
passioned style:  the  other  class,  if  discussed  tastefully, 
must  appear  in  elegant  words,  with  elaborate  imagery, 
leaving  a  gorgeous  impression.  With  or  without  texts, 
subjects  have  these  varieties  of  nature.  They  need 
congruous  texts.  Good  texts  on  immortality  are  not 
numerous  in  the  Scriptures.  Shall  a  preacher  content 
himself  with  the  language  of  Christ  to  his  disciples, 
"  Fear  not  them  which  kill  the  body,  but  are  not  able  to 
kill  the  soul,"  in  order  to  evade  the  grand  text,  "  This 
corruptible  must  put  on  incorruption,  and  tliis  mortal 
must  put  on  immortality.  .  .  .  Then  shall  be  brought 
to  pass  the  saying  that  is  written.  Death  is  swallowed 
up  in  victory"? 

Furthermore,  some  occasions  demand  eloc|uentjtexts. 
Occasions  occur  on  which  a  preacher  must  make  a  great 
effort.  The  theme  must  be  great,  the  sermon  great, 
and  the  text  on  a  level  with  both.  Dr.  South,  when  he 
preached  before  Charles  the  Second  on  the  anniversary 
of  the  "  martyrdom  of  King  Charles  the  First  of  blessed 
memory,"  struck  the  key-note  of  the  sympathies  of  his 
audience  by  a  text  taken  from  the  narrative  of  the  ?arly 
barbarism  of  the  Hebrews,  recorded  in  the  Book  of 
Judges:  "And  it  was  so  that  all  that  saw  it  said, 
There  was  no  such  deed  done  nor  seen  from  the  day 
that  the  children  of  Israel  came  up  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt  unto  this  day :  consider  of  it,  take  advice,  and 
speak  your  minds."      There   are   occasions   on   which 


(J 


LECT.  vn.]  THE  TEXT :   DIGNITY.  95 

text,  subject,  sermon,  prayer,  hymns,  the  tunes,  and,  it 
may  be,  the  very  drapery  of  the  pulpit  should  be  sug- 
gestive of  an  extraordinary  event.  Every  thing  must 
be  becoming  to  such  an  occasion :  whatever  is  not  so 
will  jar  upon  the  wrought-up  sensibilities  of  the  hearers. 

These  reasons  are  conclusive  for  the  admission  ol 
promising  texts  into  the  pulpit.  Yet,  as  they  are  liable 
to  abuse,  we  have  occasion  to  remember  certain  cau 
tions  in  the  use  of  them.  One  is,  that  they  should  not 
be  the  exclusive  favorites  of  a  preacher.  Eloquent 
texts,  often  chosen,  degenerate  in  the  popular  esteem. 
A  preacher  gains  a  name  for  grandiloquence,  which  is 
transferred  unjustly  to  his  favorite  Scriptures.  Anothei. 
caution  is,  that  we  should  guard  against  the  dangers  in- 
cident to  the  treatment  of  promising  texts.  Those  dan- 
gers, though  real,  are  not  inevitable.  If  a  preacher  is 
self-possessed  under  the  inspiration  of  his  text,  he  will 
use  it :  he  will  not  suffer  it  to  use  him.  Practically  a 
preacher's  good  sense  will  regulate  his  use  of  this  class  /^ 
of  texts. 

(3)  Certain  suggestions  concerning  the  impression 
of  a  text  upon  an  audience  arrange  themselves  under 
the  general  inquiry.  What  is  essential  to  the  dignity 
of  a  text?  Is  not  all  inspired  language  of  sufficient 
dignity  for  the  pulpit  ?  No ;  not  when  isolated  as  a 
text.  In  the  third  chapter  of  Lamentations,  verse  six- 
teenth, occurs  the  text,  "  Gravel-stones."  Is  this  a  dig- 
uified  text  ?  It  suggests  the  rule  that  the  dignity  of  a 
text  requires  that  it  shall  not  be  restricted  to  a  single 
WDrd.  One  of  the  ancient  preachers  delivered  a  ser- 
mon  on  the  word  "  But."  We  can  conceive  of  an 
ingenious  discourse  on  this  very  significant  particle, 
yet  it  is  a  very  insignificant  text.  What  shall  we  say, 
then,  of  the  selection  of  such  words  as  "  Remember," 


96  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHLNQ.  [lbct.  vn 

*' Rejoice,"  " Repent,"  "  Jehovah,"  "Sabbath,"  ''Faiih," 
"Anathema,"  "  Christ,"  "  Verily,"  "Charity"?  They 
all  fall  under  the  same  condemnation.  Fruitful  as  they 
are  of  suggestion,  it  is  an  affectation  of  smartness  to 
choose  them  as  texts.  What  shall  we  do,  then,  if  the 
significance  of  the  word  "Christ"  or  "Jehovah"  is 
the  theme  of  the  sermon?  Take  a  passage  in  which 
the  word  occurs,  announce  a  grammatical  section  of  it, 
and  then  limit  attention  to  the  word  by  the  proposi- 
tion. Any  other  method  is  unnatural.  No  matter  how 
solemn  the  selected  word  may  be,  it  is  not  impressive 
if  so  announced  as  to  appear  artificial. 

In  the  same  line  of  remark  lies  the  more  general 
principle,  that  texts  should  notjje  mutilated  for  the 
sake  of  giving  them  a  forced  pertinence.  Homiletic 
authorities  present  abundant  examples  of  this  error. 
Generally  they  are  miserable  attempts  at  facetiousness. 
We  need  not  debate  them.  It  was  unworthy  of  Dr. 
South  to  preach  to  a  corporation  of  tailors  on  the  text, 
"  A  remnant  shall  be  saved."  The  good  sense  of  every 
man  condemns  this,  and  the  reverent  feeling  of  every 
Christian  pronounces  it  beneath  the  dignity  of  the 
pulpit.  Yet,  in  the  principle  which  underlies  it,  it  is 
not  more  objectionable  than  the  indulgences  of  some 
more  sober  preachers.  For  example,  one  preacher  dis- 
courses on  the  text,  "  There  is  no  God."  This  is  in 
spired  language,  but  it  is  not  inspired  thought.  An- 
other has  a  discourse  on  the  text,  "Be  ye  angry;"  the 
design  of  the  discourse  being  to  show  the  duty  of  a 
virtuous  indignation.  But  this  is  not  the  inspired 
design.  Chrysostom's  sermon  on  excessive  grief  at  the 
death  of  friends  is  from  the  text,  "I  would  not  have 
you  to  be  ignorant,  brethren,  concerning  them  which 
are  asleep,  that  ye  sorrow  not."     But  this  is  not  the 


/c^^^ 


LKCT.  vu.]  THE  TEXT :   DIGNITY.  97 

apostolic   injunction.      In   condemning    this   abuse   of 
texts,  good  sense  echoes  the  verdict  of  good  taste. 

Such  abuses  of  texts  as  these  very  naturally  excited 
the  disgust  of  Voltaire  at  the  whole  custom  of  using 
texts.  The  papal  pulpit  had  been  full  of  such  imperti- 
nences. They  were  so  characteristic  of  preaching  at 
the  height  of  the  papal  corruption,  that  it  became  a 
proverb,  adopted  from  one  of  the  early  cardinals,  to 
exclaim,  if  one  happened  to  hit  upon  a  happy  travesty 
of  the  Scriptures,  "  Good  for  the  pulpit !  keep  that 
for  a  sermon  !  " 

There  is  one  apparent  exception  to  this  principle, 
which  is  not  a  real  one.  It  is  where  a  passage  is  re- 
trenched by  elision,  and  yet  is  a  pertinent  text,  because 
the  fragment  chosen  does  not  depart  from  the  spirit  of 
the  whole.  "  By  grace  are  ye  saved  "  is  a  good  text, 
because  the  fragment,  and  the  passage  from  which  it  is 
taken  lie  on  the  same  plane  and  in  the  same  line  of 
thought.  There  is,  then,  no  mutilation  of  the  passage, 
and  no  want  of  dignity  in  the  text.  The  exception  is 
only  apparent ;  and  it  represents  a  large  class  of  frag- 
mentary passages,  which  are  perfectly  good  texts. 

Yet   again;   it  is   essential   to   the  dignity  of  texts 
that  they  should  not  be  such  as  to  suggest  low  or  ludi- 
crous associations.     The  following  are   examples  from 
the  extant  literature  of  the  pulpit,  —  "I  have  put  off^ 
my  coat ;  how  shall  I  put  it  on  ? "   "  The  bellows  are^^-^ 
burned : "    "  There  was   no   harm   in   the   pot^*^  '^  Y&^fj 
are  straitened  in  your  own   bowels :  "    "  Moab   is  m^S'J 
wash-potj_"    ''A  jewel   of  gold   in  a  swine's  srout:"^^ 
^'  The  dog  is  turned  to_his_own_yo^jt^3gain ;  and  the/?/] 
sow  that  was  washed,  to  lier  wallowing  in  the  mire."     ' 
These  are  biblical.     Sermons  have  been  preached  upon 
them ;  but  they  are  beneath  the  dignity  of  the  pulpit     | 


i^J 


98  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lbct.  vii 

That  inspiration  has  recorded  them  is  no  evidence  that 
inspiration  authorizes  the  use  of  them  as  texts.  The 
proprieties  of  location  are  every  thing  here.  A  pas- 
sage in  its  place  in  the  inspired  record  may  fit  into  the 
picture  of  inspired  meaning,  with  its  oriental  surround- 
ings ;  but  it  does  not  follow  that  the  passage  is  a  becom- 
f  (-    \     ing  text  for  an  occidental  pulpit. 

\f\\         This  suggests  that  the  dignity  of  a  text  requires  that 
^^  I     it  be  not   such  as   to  violate  modern   and   occidental 
ideas  of  delicacy.     Dr.  Watts  endeavored  to  versify  foi 
ublic  worship  some  passages  from  the  Song  of  Solomon. 
But  the  good  taste  of  the  Church  has  silently  dropped 
I    y^^  nearly  every  one  of  those  lyrics.     They  are  stored  in 
r  ^^^^our  older  hymn-books ;  but  no  pastor  offers  them,  and 
■^^        no  choir  nor  audience  uses  them  for  purposes  of  song. 
The  elder  Puritan  taste  luxuriated  in  that  portion  of 
the  Scriptures  as  a  source  of  texts;  but  an  advanced 
culture  is  much  more  discriminating  in  the   selection, 
and  wisely  so.     Many  of  the  most  intense  passages  of 
that   epithalamium  ^re   exquisitely    beautiful   in   their 
places  as   parts  of  an  Eastern   bridal-song;  but   those 
same   passages,  isolated  from   their   surroundings,  and 
exalted  as  texts,  to  be  scrutinized  by  modern  and  occi- 
dental criticism,  are  simply  repulsive.     That  is  not   a 
fastidious  taste  which  is  offended  by  them.     That  is  no 
/-        /    affectation  which  avoids  them. 

yj  (4)  The  relation  of  a  text  to  an  audience  suggests 
/  the  further  inquiry.  What  principles  should  govern 
a  j)reacher  respecting  the  choice  of  novel  texts?  In 
reply,  it  should  be  observed  that  the  pulpit  has  some 
standard  texts.  "  Joy  shall  be  in  heaven  over  one  sin- 
ner that  repenteth  :  "  "  What  shall  I  do  to  be  saved  ?  " 
*'  I  pray  thee  have  me  excused :  "  "  Almost  thou  per- 
suadest  me  to  be  a  Christian  : "    "  Go  thy  way  for  this 


LJEOT.  vn.]  THE  TEXT :    NOVELTY.  99 

time:"  "Now  is  the  accepted  time,"  —  these  and  a 
large  number  of  the  same  class  contain  themes  which 
are  nowhere  else  so  pithily  expressed.  They  seem  as  if 
they  had  been  fore-ordained  primarily  for  use  in  the 
discussion  of  those  themes  in  the  pulpit.  It  would  be 
affectation  to  avoid  these  standard  texts,  for  no  othei 
reason  than  that  they  are  familiar  to  all.  Every  faitli- 
ful  preacher  must  employ  them,  though  every  faithf\il 
preacher  of  much  experience  before  him  has  done  the 
same.  (  They  are  among  the  jewels  of  the  pulpit.  Dia- 
monds are  never  obsolete,    j 

Yet,  on  the  other  hand,  a  large  proportion  of  sermons 
should  be  upon  unhackneyed  texts,  and  this  for  several 
reasons.     Some  of  the  advantages  of  obscure  texts  are, 
also,  advantages  of  novel  texts.     Especially  are  novel       /     'a 
texts  desirable,  often,  for  the  sake  of  the  interest  they,  /^^^ 

small  in  God's  service."     One  of  the  most  masterly  sue-        "^kV 

cesses  of  the  pulpit  is  that  of  freshenmg_an__old_story.  r 

Other  things  being  equal,  a  novel  text  is  an  element  in 

this  power.     A  novel  text  is  a  new  voice.     The  novel 

text,  like  an  obscure  text,  may  also  promote  exposition 

of  the  Scriptures.     Often  it  will  be  an  obscure  text, 

and  will  demand  exposition.     If  it  is  not  obscure,  the 

announcement   of  it  is   an   addition   to  the  scriptural 

knowledge  of  many ;  and,  if  it  be  a  striking  passage,  it 

may  add  to  their  materials  of  scriptural  meditation  for 

a  life-time. 

Furthermore,  novel  texts  promote  variety  in  preach- 
ing. We  need  a  broad  range  of  biblical  authorities, 
as  we  need  a  broad  range  of  themes.  Monotony  of 
thought  in  the  pulpit  often  results,  as  we  have  seen,  finra 


excite.  True,  the  interest  of  novelty  is  not  the  most 
profound,  but  it  may  be  the  forerunner  of  a  more 
valuable   interest.     George  Herbert  said,  "Nothing  is 


cW  - 


100  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [l«:ct.  vti 

monotony  of  textual  selection.  Moreover,  a  strange 
text  will  often  facilitate  permanence  of  impression.  It 
is  a  law  of  mind  that  a  truth  is  apt  to  be  deepened  in 
its  impression  upon  us,  if  it  comes  to  us  from  an  unex- 
pected source.  A  profane  man  who  happens  to  utter 
an  acknowledgment  of  the  value  of  prayer  moves  us 
by  his  commonplace  thought  as  no  preacher  could.  It 
is  not  so  much  the  greatness  as  it  is  the  worldliness  of 
statesmen  which  often  renders  their  trite  and  jejune 
tributes  of  respect  to  Christianity  as  solemn  to  us  as 
proverbs  of  religious  wisdom. 

The  principle  here  involved  is  very  strikingly  illus- 
trated in  the  deduction  of  themes  from  unexpected 
texts.  A  listener  often  expresses  the  impression  which 
a  sermon  has  made  upon  him  by  saying,  "  I  did  not 
know  there  was  any  such  text  in  the  Bible."  Such 
a  remark  means  more  than  it  says.  It  means,  *'  That 
sermon  has  affected  me  :  its  truth  I  feel.  That  text 
has  disclosed  it  to  me,  —  a  gem  of  truth  which  I  never 
saw  before.  I  shall  remember  the  sermon  for  the  sake 
of  the  text."  Dr.  Bushnell's  sermon  on  the  theme, 
"  Every  man's  life  a  plan  of  God,"  is  a  striking  sermon 
in  itself.  It  will  be  remembered  by  many  for  the  sake 
of  the  subject,  but  by  some  for  its  deduction  of  such  a 
subject  from  an  unwonted  source,  the  text  being  the 
address  of  Jehovah  to  Cyrus,  in  Isaiah's  vision :  "  I 
girded  thee,  though  thou  hast  not  known  me."  Com- 
pare this  with  the  more  common  texts,  "  Without  me, 
ye  can  do  nothing,"  or,  "He  doeth  according  to  his  will 
in  the  army  of  heaven,  and  among  the  inhabitants  of 
the  earth." 

Dr.  Bushnell's  sermon  on  unconscious  influence  is 
another  instance  of  the  same  kind.  No  one  would  for- 
get the  sermon,  who  had  observed  its  ingenious  yet  apt 


LFCi    virj  THE  TEXT:    NOVELTY.  101 

derivation  from  a  text  which  perhaps  was  never  preached 
upon  before  :  "  Then  went  in  also  that  other  disciple." 
Compare  this  with  the  standard  text  on  the  influence 
of  Christians,  "Ye  are  the  light  of  the  world;  a  city 
that  is  set  on  a  hill  can  not  be  hid ; "  or  the  common 
text  for  a  sermon  on  the  evil  influence  of  the  wicked, 
*'  One  sinner  destroyeth  much  good."  Dr.  South's  ser- 
mon against  extemporaneous  prayer  must  have  gained 
some  force  from  the  novel  aptness  of  his  text,  "  Be  not 
rash  with  thy  mouth,  and  let  not  thine  heart  be  hasty 
to  utter  any  thing  before  God."  Compare  this  with  the 
text  so  often  employed  in  defense  of  a  liturgy,  "  After 
this  manner,  therefore,  pray  ye." 

Once  more,  an  unhackneyed  text  invites  effort  on  the 
part  of  a  preacher.  It  stimulates  his  mind  in  the  com- 
position of  a  sermon  as  it  does  the  hearer  in  listening  to 
the  sermon.  He  is  aroused  by  an  object  in  the  early 
part  of  his  work  in  constructing  the  discourse.  This 
you  will  find  to  be  often  of  great  moment  in  the  labor 
of  habitual  composition.  Do  we  never  listen  to  dis- 
courses which  are  pointless,  and  are  preached  with  no 
enthusiasm,  till  the  conclusion  approaches,  when  they 
change  signals,  and  become  luminous  with  oratorical 
fire  ?  The  preacher  has  seemed  to  construct  and  develop 
his  sermon  with  no  object  which  aroused  him  early  in 
his  work.  His  thoughts  have  not  been  intense ;  his 
transitions  have  not  been  ingenious ;  his  style  has  not 
been  vivid,  !;ill  the  peroration  has  begun  to  Icom  up ;  and 
then  "  he  mounts  up  on  wings,  as  an  eagle."  Such  dis- 
courses often  flow  from  an  indolent  use  of  a  hackneyed 
text.  The  preacher,  acting  under  the  chill  of  profes- 
sional routine,  has  allowed  himself  to  be  beguiled  into  a 
hackneyed  strain  of  remark.  He  does  not  wake  up,  and 
put  his  invention  to  the  task,  and  his  pen  to  its  speed, 


iJ-l 


102  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  vil 

till  the  application  of  his  theme  makes  him  conscioua 
of  an  object.  He  has  not  started  enthusiastically :  there- 
fore he  plods  lifelessly.  For  the  foregoing  reasons,  with- 
out subjecting  ourselves  to  any  rule  respecting  novelty 
of  texts,  we  may  wisely  adopt  the  principle,  that  while 
we  recognize  some  standard  texts,  yet,  other  things 
hfing  equal,  an  unhackneyed  text  is  preferable. 
A  1(5)  One  inquiry  remains  to  be  considered  of  that 
clfiss  which  concerns  the  impression  of  texts  upon  the 
audience.  It  is.  May  a  preacher  choose  texts  which 
to  an  audience  will  seem  to  be  personal  ?  By  person- 
ality in  a  text  is  meant  a  significance  which  applies  it 
palpably  to  any  individual,  be  he  preacher  or  hearer. 
This  is  another  of  the  topics  on  which  only  principles, 
not  rules,  can  be  laid  down.  It  is  obvious  that  a 
peacher  should  not  avoid  pungency  in  his  choice  of 
texts.  That  would  be  a  timid  caution  which  would 
prompt  a  preacher  to  do  ^his  through  fear  of  seeming 
to  mean  somebody.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is 
equally  obvious  that  a  preacher  must  not,  in  the  choice 
of  texts,  disregard  the  claims  of  courtesy.  That  is  a 
selfish  boldness  which  abuses  the  liberty  of  the  pulpit 
by  making  it  the  medium  either  of  egotism  or  of  insult. 
Our  Saviour  and  the  Apostles  were  gentlemen  in  their 
preaching. 

The  most  objectionable  forms  of  personality  in  texts 
will  be  avoidecj  by  attention  to  a  very  few  simple  prin- 
ciples. One  is  that  of  avoidmg  a  violent  accommodation 
of  texts.  A  very  large  proportion  of  those  instances  of 
textual  personality  which  make  up  in  part  the  fund 
of  clerical  anecdote  consist  of  an  extreme  license  of 
accommodation.  Scriptural  language  is  wrested,  not 
only  from  its  own  proper  sense,  but  from  all  good  sense. 
The  significant  passages  of  the  Bible,  wUch  are  usually 


^'VAA.'v^  ^^i^r*-  ^WKtf-'v-a   /   ^t-vs-ju^/^ 

LECT.  vn.]  THE  TEXT :   PERSONALITY.   ^  103 

chosen  as  texts,  are  not  so  framed  as  to  strike  indi 
viduals  alone.  They  have  a  range  of  shot :  they  covei 
classes  of  men.  A  preacher  may  aim  them  at  an  indi 
vidual ;  but  they  reach  an  individual  as  the  representa 
tive  of  a  class.  Hence  violence  must  be  done  to  them 
to  give  them  a  significance  which  shall  apply  them  to 
an  individual  alone. 

Let  us  test  this  by  one  or  two  examples.  The  sub- 
ject is  of  some  importance  as  affecting  the  whole  range 
of  clerical  impertinence.  Many  years  ago,  a  man  re- 
siding in  West  Springfield,  Mass.,  was  buried  by  the 
caving-in  of  a  well.  He  remained  for  some  hours  in  a 
perilous  condition,  and  was  rescued  in  the  last  stages 
of  exhaustion.  On  the  following  Sabbath  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Lathrop,  pastor  of  the  Congregational  Church  in  the 
town,  announced  as  his  text,  "  Look  ...  to  the  hole  of 
the  pit  whence  ye  are  digged."  This  was  one  of  the 
mildest  forms  of  a  personal  text.  The  man  referred  to 
probably  did  not  faint  under  it.  But  how  does  it  strike 
a  thoughtful  hearer  as  an  application  of  the  word  of 
God  ?     Was  it  a  manly  use  of  inspired  language  ? 

A  certain  pastor  lost  his  popularity  with  his  people, 
and  they  refused  to  pay  his  salary.  He  sued  them  for 
it,  and  gained  the  suit.  They,  in  revenge,  paid  him  in 
coppers.  He,  in  rejoinder,  preached  a  farewell  sermou 
on  the  text,  "  Alexander  the  coppersmith  did  me  much 
evil."  This  was  a  Roland  for  an  Oliver ;  but  was  it  a 
dignified  treatment  of  the  Scriptures  ?  The  vast  major* 
ity  of  cases  of  personality  in  the  choice  of  texts  are  just 
such  violent  applications  of  biblical  words  by  an  abuse 
of  accommodation.  Let  a  preacher  preserve  a  manly 
habit  in  the  accommodation  of  texts,  and  he  will  not 
be  betrayed  into  such  distortions. 

A  due  regard  for  a  second  principle  will  protect  a 


fr 


fxjM^i^  pyf 


104  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [user.  vn. 

/preacher  against  improper  personalities  m  the  choice 
/of  texts:  it  is  that  such  freedom  with  the  Scriptures 
is  founded  on  a  false  theory  of  clerical  influence.  Real 
power  in  a  clergyman  is  essentially  solemn  and  affec- 
tionate. Those  elements  in  a  man's  ministry  which 
appeal  to  conscience  and  to  the  sense  of  kindness  are 
the  chief  sources  of  the  strength  of  his  pulpit.  With- 
out these,  he  may  gain  notoriety,  but  not  influence. 
Such  influence  as  he  may  seem  to  gain  is  not  clerical  in 
its  nature.  Therefore  to  him  it  is  worse  than  none.  A 
man  who  establishes  a  reputation  for  personality,  oddity, 
or  buffoonery  in  the  pulpit,  does  just  so  much  against 
his  reputation,  and  therefore  against  his  usefulness  as  a 
Christian  preacher.  He  establishes  a  kind  of  influence 
of  which  he  can  not  but  feel  ashamed  when  he  is  clothed, 
and  in  his  right  mind,  and  begins  to  aim  at  the  conver- 
sion of  souls.  By  his  buffoonery  he  has  done  a  work 
which  he  must  undo,  before  he  can  successfully  approach 
men  who  are  inquiring  what  they  must  do  to  be  saved, 
or  men  who  are  in  affliction,  or  men  who  are  on  a  death- 
bed. Yet  these  are  among  the  classes  of  our  congrega- 
tions whose  instincts  about  a  preacher  are  the  most 
unerring  test  of  his  clerical  influence.  It  is  a  curse  to 
a  minister  to  have  an  influence  founded  on  qualities 
which  are  repellant  to  the  sympathies  of  such  minds. 
No  preacher  can  afford  to  support  the  reputation  of 
having  more  grit  than  grace.  A  clergyman  was  once 
settled  in  one  of  our  cities,  of  whom  an  intelligent 
lawyer,  not  a  Christian  man,  used  substantially  this 
language,  "I  admire  my  pastor.  He  is  a  tingling 
preacher,  witty,  eloquent,  severe.  He  is  not  afraid  of 
a  laugh  in  his  audience.  I  am  willing  to  pay  largely 
to  retain  him,  and  so  are  we  all.  But  if  I  were  in  afflic- 
tion, or  were  about  to  die,  he  is  the  last  man  I  should 


utcr.  m.]  THE  TEXT :   PERSONALITY.  105 

want  to  see  then."  Such  a  criticism,  if  well  founded, 
should  annihilate  a  pastor.  What  must  the  Savioui 
think  of  him !  We  can  not  too  earnestly  remind  oui-- 
selves  that  clerical  influence  may  be  easily  sacrificed 
to  clerical  notoriety.  And  no  two  things  are  more 
unlike. 

A  third  principle,  which,  if  properly  regarded,  will 
protect  a  preacher  from  certain  forms  of  impertinent 
personality  in  his  choice  of  texts,  is  that  modesty  is  a 
power  in  a  public  man.  A  genuine  modesty  will  pre- 
vent a  preacher  from  thrusting  himself  immoderately, 
or  in  an  untimely  way,  upon  the  attention  of  his  hear- 
ers. Tact  is  needed  to  strike  always  the  right  line  of 
procedure  in  this  respect.  It  was  not  a  clerical  im- 
propriety in  an  aged  clergyman  in  Worcester  County, 
Massachusetts,  whose  son  was  ordained  as  his  colleague, 
to  preach  at  the  ordination  upon  the  text,  "  He  must 
increase ;  but  I  must  decrease."  A  favorite  and  becom 
ing  text  for  sermons  of  pastoral  reminiscence,  in  which 
after  a  quarter  or  half  century  of  service,  pastors  may 
properly  speak  of  their  own  labors,  is,  "Having  ob 
tained  help  of  God,  I  continue  unto  this  day." 

The  modesty  of  these  personal  texts  is  obvious.  la 
it  as  obvious  in  the  text  of  the  young  preacher,  who 
in  a  farewell  sermon,  after  a  ministry  of  three  yeara^ 
preached  upon  the  words,  "  Remember  that  by  tht? 
space  of  three  years  I  ceased  not  to  warn  e^ery  one, 
night  and  day,  with  tears"?  Was  there  net  an  intol- 
erable impudence  in  the  personality  of  the  following 
instance  ?  An  evangelist  of  considerable  reputation 
vvas  invited  to  preach  in  a  certain  place ;  and  the  reason 
urged  for  his  acceptance  was  that  the  pastor  had  out- 
lived his  influence,  and  the  people  were  in  a  distracted 
state.     The  evangelist  came,  and  commenced  his  work 


o/ 


\\ 


106  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING  [lect.  m 

with  the  text,  "Without^ me  ye  can  do  nothing." 
Against  all  such  impertinences  a  preacher  is  protected 
by  simply  remembering  that  modesty  is  itself  a  power 
in  a  public  man. 

One  other  principle,  which  will  also  tend  to  shield  the 
pulpit  from  a  perverted  personality  in  texts,  is  that  a 
preacher  has  no  right  to  invade  the  privacy  of  domestic 
life.  The  clergy  need  sometimes  to  be  reminded  of 
the  old  maxim  of  English  law,  that  every  man's 
house  is  his  castle.  As  a  preacher,  a  man  may  not  say 
every  thing  which  as  a  pastor  he  may  say.  As  a  pastor, 
a  man  is  the  personal  friend  of  his  people.  He  goes 
into  their  homes,  and  there  may  speak  in  all  fidelity 
truths  which  it  would  be  impudence  to  utter  in  his  pul- 
pit. Again :  as  a  preacher,  a  man  may  utter  in  the 
body  of  a  sermon  things  which  he  may  not  say  in  a 
text.  It  may  be  a  stretch  of  his  authority  to  accom- 
modate a  text  to  a  hearer,  so  that,  because  it  is  a  text, 
it  shall  stick  to  him  like  a  label  to  a  man  in  a  pillory. 
But  the  most  offensive  errors  of  this  kind  are  those  in 
which  a  preacher  chooses  texts  by  which  he  invades  the 
sanctity  of  his  own  home  by  foisting  his  private  affairs 
upoli  the  notice  of  his  people.  A  pastor  in  Massachu- 
setts made  the  Scriptures  the  medium  of  his  rudeness 
of  culture  by  preaching,  on  the  Sabbath  morning  after 
his  marriage,  from  the  text,  "  Two  are  better  than 
one ; "  and,  on  the  Sabbath  after  the  birth  of  his  child, 
fi'om  the  text,  "Unto  us  a  son  is  given."  No  man 
who  is  fitted  for  the  pulpit  in  other  respects  will  be 
guilty  of  such  blunders  as  these ;  but  perversions  in 
which  the  principle  is  the  same,  any  preacher  is  liable 
to,  whose  self-respect  does  not  unite  with  his  reverence 
for  the  Scriptures  to  prevent  his  indulgence  of  a  frivo 
lous  or  a  rude  taste  in  his  selection  of  texts. 


lMi\-  e-^ 


^,  /ix*^^  A^       J  /.  AV-^  •"'^ 


/^i 


(^y^c.^^;^..^  ^^:;rrc? 


THE  TEXT :    PERTINENCY,   COMPLETENESS,   ACCOMMO    ^  ^^. 


DATION.  !  '^ 


4th,  We  have  thus  considered  the  sources  of  texts, 
Riid  the  form  of  texts,  and  the  relation  of  texts  to 
the  audience.  Let  us  now  advance  to  a  fourth  class  of 
inquiries,  which  concern  the  relation  of  a  text  to  the 
main  body  of  a  sermon. 

(1)  Of  these  the  first  is.  On  what  principles  shall 
we  judge  of  the  pertinency  of  a  text  ?  Pertinency  to 
the  sermon  is  the  most  vital  quality  of  a  good  text. 
Vinet  says  that  no  human  book  has  been  so  tortured 
and  jested  with  as  the  Scriptures  have  been  by  preach- 
ers in  their  choice  of  texts.  With  equal  justice,  he 
charges  the  Romish  pulpit  with  having  been  specially 
culpable  in  diminishing  thus  the  respect  due  to  the 
word  of  God.  Protestant  usage  has  been  corrupted  to 
a  greater  extent  than  is  commonly  imagined  by  the 
relics  of  Romish  levity  in  the  treatment  of  the  Bible, 
Yet  a  very  large  proportion  of  these  abuses  would  have 
been  prevented,  if  a  manly  taste  had  protected  the  sin- 
gle excellence  of  pertinency  between  text  and  theme. 

Let  it  be  observed,  then,  that  the  pertinency  of  a  text 
relates  chiefly  to  cqngrujty  of  sentiment_..between  text 
and  theme.  A  perfect  text  will  express  exactly  the 
subject  of  the  sermon,  no  more,  and  no  less.     Con- 

107 


^j 


108  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [o:ct.  vm 

gi'uity  of  sentiment,  then,  may  be  sacrificed  in  several 
^{/  ^^y^-  ^t  is  sacrificed  by  the  selection  of  a  text  which 
•d«es  not  contain  the  subject,  either  expressly,  or  by  im- 
plication, or  by  natural  suggestion.  P'or  example,  one 
clergyman  —  the  author,  by  the  way,  of  a  treatise  on 
preaching  —  has  a  sermon  oti  education,  the  text  of 
whi^h  is,  ''  Thou  slialt  not  steal."  An  English  j)reach  J|^ 
er  selected  as  his  text  the  words,  ''•Glory  to  God  in  tlie*^ 
highest,  and  on  earth  peace,  good-will  toward  men," 
and  then  proceeded  to  announce  his  subject,  which 
was,  "to  examine  the  doctrines  of  Calvin  as  laid 
down  in  his  Institutes."  A  French  preacher  selected 
the  text,  "  Therefore  thou  art  inexcusable,  O  man, 
whosoever  thou  art,  that  judgest ; "  and  from  these 
words  he  professed  to  derive  the  subject  of  capital 
punishment.  These  are  flagrant  cases  of  incongruity , 
but  in  principle  they  are  the  same  with  the  entire  class 
of  texts,  which,  by  misrepresentation,  are  made  to  intro- 
duce a  theme  which  is  foreign  to  their  real  meaning. 
•A  text  foreign  to  the  subject  is  no  text. 
r  D  /  Again :  the  pertinency  of  a  text  is  sacrificed  where 
/  the  text  contains  the  subject,  "But  not  the  proposition ; 
that  is,  where  it  contains  a  different  aspect  of  the  subject 
from  that  which  the  sermon  discusses.  Some  preachers 
are  fond  of  making  a  text  and  a  proposition  seem  to 
contradict  each  other.  One  preacher  discourses  on  tne 
perseverance  of  the  saints,  designing  to  vindicate  tho 
doctrine ;  but  he  adopts  as  his  text  the  words  of  St. 
Paul  to  the  Galatians,  "  Ye  are  fallen  from  grace."  Dr. 
South  has  a  sermon  on  the  truth  that  "  Good  Intentions 
*  \  are  no  Excuse  for  Bad  Actions;"  but  the  text  is,  "1/ 
there  be  first  a  willing  mind,  it  is  accepted,  according  to 
that  a  man  hath."  These  are  frivolous  uses  of  the  in- 
spired thought :  the  remote  consequences  of  them  may 


LKCi.  vin.]  THE  TEXT  :    PERTINENCY.  10 S 

be  more  serious  than  the  immediate  evil.  One  abuse 
invites  another :  one  abuse  justifies  another.  The  prin- 
ciple of  a  slight  abuse  is  the  principle  of  an  extreme 
abuse.  The  moment  we  abandon  common  sense  in 
interpretation,  we  abandon  all  sense  which  can  com- 
mand respect.  The  mystical  uses  of  the  Scriptures 
advocated  by  Origen  and  Augustine,  and  revived  by 
Swedenborg,  are  the  logical  result  of  some  of  the 
homiletic  usages  adopted  by  preachers  in  the  choice 
of  texts. 

Furthermore,  the  pertinency  of  a  text  is  often  sacri 
ficed  by  the  choice  of  a  general  text  for  a  specific  sub 
ject.  "  Grow  in  grace  "  is  not  a  good  text  for  a  sermon 
on  humility.  "  They  went  out  and  preached  that  men 
should  repent"  is  not  a  good  text  for  a  discourse  on 
encouragements  to  repentance.  A  more  pertinent  text 
would  be,  "  Repent  ye  therefore,  and  be  converted,  that 
your  sins  may  be  blotted  out."  On  the  same  principle, 
the  passage,  "  They  shall  be  my  people,  and  I  will  be 
their  God,"  is  not  a  pertinent  text  for  a  sermon  on  the 
sympathy  of  God  with  his  people.  Saurin  has  a  ser- 
mon on  this  theme  from  a  far  better  text,  because  moie 
specifically  expressive  of  the  theme :  "  He  that  touch- 
eth  you  toucheth  the  apple  of  His  eye."  This  text 
thrills  the  hearer  with  its  image  of  the  subject. 

We  should  observe,  however,  that  a  specific  text  for 
rt  specific  theme  is  not  always  practicable.  Some  sub- 
jects are  not  specifically  named,  or  implied,  or  suggested, 
in  the  Scriptures.  For  such  themes  we  are  compelled 
to  choose  a  general  text ;  that  is,  an  inferior  text.  Still 
this  quality  of  pertinency  of  sentiment  is  the  crowning 
virtue  of  a  text:  it  should  never  be  needlessly  sacri< 
ficed  or  impaired.  Many  preachers  habitually  choose 
unsuggestive  texts.     They  seem  to  think  that  any  thing 


;;^/ 


110  THE  THEORY   OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  vm 

will  do  for  a  text,  Jf  the  subject  has  even  a  remote  con- 
nection with  it.  /On  the  contrary,  a  reyerent  preacher, 
and  a  live  man  in  the  pulpit,  will  aim  to  make  a  text, 
)if  possil'le,  strike  a  good  blow  for  his  conclusion*/ 
/  But  i»ertinency  in  a.  text  is  not  restricted  to  the 
sentiment.  It  relates,  also,  to  congruity  of  rhetorical 
structure  between  the  text  and  the  sermon.  Is  there 
uot,  to  the  eye  of  good  taste,  an  incongruity  between  a 
very  imaginative  text  and  a  severely  argumentative 
discourse?  Do  we  not  feel  a  similar  infelicity  be- 
tween a  difficult  logical  text,  and  a  hortatory  address  ? 
Neither  an  argumentative  nor  a  hortatory  address  on 
the  duty  of  religious  conversation  with  impenitent  men 
would  very  congruously  follow  the  text,  "  A  word  fitly 
spoken  is  like  apples  of  gold  in  pictures  of  silver. "  Per- 
tinency of  rhetorical  structure  is  one  of  the  secondary 
excellences  of  a  text.  Often  it  is  not  practicable.  We 
should  not  subject  ourselves  to  a  rule  requiring  it :  still 
it  is  a  beauty  where  it  is  attainable,  and  very  many 
themes  of  the  pulpit  admit  of  variety  of  choice  in  this 
jespect.  Let  me  illustrate  this.  Here  is  a  hortatory 
fc3xt,  "Fear  not  them  which  kill  the  body."  Here  is 
a  historic  text,  "And,  when  he  had  said  this,  he  fell 
asleep."  The  following  is  an  exclamatory  text,  "O 
Death !  where  is  thy  sting  ?  "  This  is  an  argumentative 
text,  "  There  remaineth,  therefore,  a  rest  to  the  peo- 
ple of  God."  Another  is  a  didactic  text,  "Into  thy 
hand  I  commit  my  spirit."  We  have  a  text  of  solilo- 
juy  in  the  passage,  "All  the  days  of  my  appointed 
time  will  I  wait,  till  my  change  come."  From  all  these 
texts  might  be  derived,  either  by  logical  deduction  or 
by  natural  suggestion,  the  subject  of  a  good  man's 
peace  in  death.  Yet  it  is  not  difficult  to  see  that  a 
ke^n  sense  of  rhetorical  pertinency  would  require,  some 


Lmcrr.  vm.]  THE  TEXT :    PERTINENCY.  Ill 

reference,  in  the  selection,  to  the  rhetorical  character  of 
the  sermon. 

But  pertinency  in  a  text  is  not  confined  to  congruity        /- 
of  sentiment   and   of   rhetorical   structure:   it  relates,      (Y^ 
also,  to  congruity  of  ^he  associations  of  the  text  with  / 

the  object  of  the  sermon.  The  associations  of  a  text 
should,  if  possible,  be  such  as  to  aid  the  subject  of  the 
sermon.  This  kind  of  congruity  will  be  best  understood 
by  seme  illustrations  of  the  want  of  it.  A  preacher 
discoursed  upon  the  exalted  rank  of  the  redeemed  in 
the  future  world,  and  he  chose  for  his  text  the  words 
"  Ye  shall  be  as  gods."  Here  the  subject  is  above  the 
text,  and  the  associations  of  the  text  tend  to  drag 
down  the  subject  to  a  level  with  the  work  of  devils. 
An  evangelist  in  the  State  of  New  York  preached  upon  1 
the  solemnity  of  the  close  of  a  protracted  meeting,  and 
selected  as  his  text  the  dying  words  of  Christ,  "It 
is  finished."  Such  conceits  as  these  degrade  texts  into 
connections  with  themes  which  can  not  by  any  inge- 
nuity be  forced  up  to  a  level  with  the  texts.  Apolo- 
gies for  such  uses  of  texts  should  go  for  nothing.  We 
should  not  be  deceived,  if  we  can  palliate  them  plausi- 
bly. They  are  deformities,  often  monstrosities,  how- 
ever blandly  or  reverently  we  may  disguise  them  in  an 
apologetic  introduction. 

Observe,  now,  how  the  associations  of  a  text  may  aid 
a  subject  by  the  force  of  sympathy  with  it.  You  wish 
to  preach  a  discourse  on  diligence  in  the  Christian  life, 
and  you  select  as  a  text  the  words  expressive  of  the 
ycuthful  awakening  of  Christ  to  his  life's  work,  "  Wist 
ye  not  that  I  must  be  about  my  Father's  business?" 
You  wish  to  preach  a  sermon  to  Christians  on  neglect 
of  prayer,  and  you  adopt  the  words  of  Christ  in  the 
garden,   "What I   could   ye  not  watch  with  me  one 


112  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  Tlect.  vin 

hour  ?  "  You  wish  to  preach  on  the  forgiveness  of  in- 
juries, and  you  take  as  your  text,  "Father,  forgive 
them ;  for  they  know  not  what  they  do."  Would  not 
the  associations  of  these  texts  be  auxiliary  to  the  object 
of  the  sermons?  I  have  said  that  this  congruity  of 
association  should  be  obtained,  if  possible.  Sometimes 
it  is  not  possible.  We  can  not,  therefore,  prescribe  any 
rule  of  universal  application.  We  can  only  say  that 
the  congruity  of  association  is  an  excellence  in  a  text, 
when  it  is  practicable. 

(2)  A  second  inquiry  concerning  the  relation  of  a 
text  to  the  body  of  a  sermon  is.  What  principles  apply 
to  the  regulation  of  incompleteness  and  redundancy  in 
texts? 

In  answer,  let  it  be  observed  that  good  taste  requires 
that  a  text  should  comprise  no  less  material  than  is 
discussed  in  the  sermon.  The  text  should,  in  some 
natural  development  of  thought,  cover  the  whole  area 
of  a  sermon :  it  should  not  be  a  patch  upon  the  fabric 
Dr.  Emmons  has  a  discourse  on  the  being  and  perfeo* 
tions  of  God.  You  observe  the  subject  is  of  the  most 
general  kind :  it  suggests  a  broadcast  discussion.  But 
what  is  the  text  ?  Is  it  an  equally  comprehensive  pas- 
sage, like  the  words  of  Jehovah  to  Moses,  "  I  am  that 
I  am ; "  or  the  words  of  the  Psalmist,  "  Know  ye  that 
the  Lord  he  is  God?"  Not  these,  but  the  argumen- 
tative passage  from  St.  Paul  to  the  Hebrews,  "  Every 
house  is  fcuilded  by  some  man ;  but  he  that  built  all 
things  is  God."  Why  is  not  this  a  perfect  text?  Be- 
cause it  covers  but  a  portion  of  the  theme.  It  is  an 
admirable  text  for  a  sermon  on  the  being  of  God  as 
proved  by  the  argument  from  design;  but  for  a  dis- 
course on  the  being  and  perfections  of  God  it  is  ui- 
complete.  (  A  text  may  not  specify  all  the  topics  of  a 


j:ct.  vra.]  THE  TEXT :    COMPLETENESS  113 


) 


Bermon ;  but  it  ought  to  comprise  them  all,  as  a  princi- 
ple comprises  all  its  applications. 

Further,  good  taste  requires  that,  if  possible,  a  text 
shall  comprise  n^  more  material  than  is  discussed  in  the 
sermon.  The  reason  for  this  is  its  obvious  tendency  to 
promote  unity  of  impression.  Study  of  texts  for  the 
sake  of  retrenchment  down  to  the  precise  limits  of  the 
subjects  is  the  mark  of  an  accomplished  preacher.  A 
text  is  for  use.  Enough  is  better  than  more.  Dr. 
South's  precision  in  his  selections  is  often  excellent. 
For  instance,  he  discourses  on  a  subject  which  he  en- 
titles "Christianity  mysterious,  and  the  wisdom  of 
God  in  making  it  so ; "  and  his  text  is,  "  We  speak  the 
wisdom  of  God  in  a  mystery."  He  preaches  on  the 
love  of  Christ  for  his  disciples,  and  chooses  the  text, 
"  Henceforth  I  call  you  not  servants ;  .  .  .  but  I  have 
called  you  friends."  One  advantage  of  deriving  sub- 
jects from  texts,  instead  of  choosing  texts  for  subjects, 
is  that  redundancy  of  text  is  more  easily  avoided. 
But  sometimes,  often  indeed,  it  can  not  be  avoided. 
We  can  not  always  find  a  passage  which  expresses  ex- 
actly our  theme,  no  more  and  no  less.  We  must,  then, 
admit  redundancy  as  a  less  evil  than  incompleteness. 
Too  much  is  a  less  evil  than  too  little. 

This  suggests  that  good  taste  forbids  the  elimination  &* 
of  superfluous  material  from  within  the  limits  of  a  text.  ^  ^ 
This  error  is  not  that  of  mutilating  a  text  for  the  sake 
of  a  forced  pertinency ;  nor  is  it  that  of  elision  from 
the  end  of  a  passage,  nor  that  of  omission  from  its  be- 
ginning :  it  is  elimination  from  within  a  text,  as  super- 
fluous terms  are  thrown  out  from  an  algebraic  equation. 
For  example,  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  occurs 
the  passage,  "Put  on,  therefore,  as  the  elect  of  God, 
holy  and  beloved,  bowels  of  mercies,  kindness,  hum 


'J 


114  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  lect.  ym 

bleness  of  mind,  meekness,  long-sufiPering."  The  late 
Rev.  Mr.  Barnes  of  Philadelphia  published  a  sermon 
on  a  benignant  spirit,  of  which  the  text  was,  "  Put  on, 
therefore,  as  the  elect  of  God,  kindness."  This  expur- 
gation of  inconvenient  elements  from  the  interior  of  a 
passage  is  not  in  good  taste.  Dr.  Watts  may  thus  pick 
up  a  version  of  a  Psalm  by  eliminating  from  the  origi- 
nal the  fragments  which  are  neither  lyrical  nor  devo- 
tioi.al;  and  on  the  same  principle  we  may  properly 
eliminate  portions  of  the  Scriptures  in  the  public  read- 
ing of  them  for  devotional  purposes.  You  may  form  a 
burial-service  with  which  that  used  by  the  Church  of 
England,  impressive  as  it  is,  can  bear  no  comparison,  by 
weaving  together  selected  fragments  of  the  Scriptures. 
But  the  selection  of  a  text  for  purposes  of  discussion 
is  a  different  thing.  Here  no  such  skill  in  ricochet  is 
agreeable. 

Therefore,  when  a  redundant  text  is  necessary,  we 
should  repeat  all  that  is  needed  to  avoid  elimination, 
and  then  specify  the  words  which  are  the  text.  Many 
passages  require  this  treatment.  For  example,  you 
wish  to  discourse  on  Christian  honesty ;  and  you  select 
as  your  text  the  eighth  verse  of  the  fourth  chapter  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  reading  the  entire  pas- 
sage. Then  you  soon  specify  the  phrase,  "  Whatsoever 
things  are  honest,"  as  containing  the  theme  of  youi 
remarks.  In  this  manner  you  preserve  the  connectic  n 
of  inspired  language,  and  do  not  distort  or  confuse 
the  ideas  of  a  hearer  respecting  it.  This  is  good  taste, 
because  it  is  the  dictate  of  reverence. 

(3)  A  third  inquiry  respecting  the  relation  of  a  text 
to  the'  sermon  is,  May  a  preacher  employ  an  accommc- 
JLaJied  text  ? 
AI     What  is  an  accommodated  text  ?    A  text  is  not  neces- 


>/-^ 


LBOT.  vm]  THE  TEXT:    ACCOMMODATION.  115 

sarily  accommodated  when  it  receives  a  different  applica-  /  // 
tion  from  that  which  it  has  in  its  inspired  use.  A  text 
^  may  be  a  biblical  fact ;  that  fact  may  illustrate  a  princi-  /5l«^ 
"*  pie ;  that  principle  may  be  susceptible  of  other  illustra-  ^^7^ 
i/j(J^-  tions :  of  those  illustrations,  one  which  is  not  expressed  6*^.,*.' 
'■^'**'  *  or  implied  in  the  text  may  be  the  theme  of  discourse.  6»3^ 
*"*'"'*^'iFor  instance,  the  evangelist  affirms  that   ''Pilate  and     '^/z' 

„ Ilerod  were  made  friends  together."     This  illustrates 

kx    ,    the   principle   that  wicked   men  who   are   enemies  to 
^  /l_  ^^^  other   often   agree   in   their    deeper   hostility   to    >^^ 
^!r^ Christ.     This  principle  is  further  illustrated  in  a  vari-  n^^^^ 
^  Uy^    ety   of    ways   in    modern    life.     Of    these   ways,   one 
fi'^'^    preacher  selected  the  coalition  of  two  hostile  parties 
^^  against  the  temperance  reform  as  the  theme  of  a  dis- 
course on  a  Fast  Day.     This  was  not  an  accommodated 
text :  it  was  a  remote  application,  yet  a  perfectly  legiti- 
mate one,  of  the  principle  illustrated  in  the   original. 
Dr.  Bushnell's  sermon  on  unconscious  influence,  from 
the  text,  "  Then  went  in  also  that  other  disciple,"  was 
not  on  an  accommodated  text. 

An  accommodated  text  is  one  which  is  applied  in  a 
sermon  to  a  subject  resembling  that  of  the  text,  yet 
radically  different  from  that  of  the  text.  Examine 
an  illustration.  Bishop  Huntington  has  a  sermon  the 
subject  of  which  is  more  properly  termed  regeneration. 
He  defines  it  "  the  economy  of  renewal."  His  text  is 
taken  from  Micah,  "Arise  ye  and  depart;  for  this  is 
not  your  rest."  This  passage  does  not  express  the  doo 
trine  of  the  sermon ;  it  does  not  imply  that  doctriiie ; 
it  can  not  by  any  logical  inference  be  made  to  reach 
that  doctrine:  it  is,  therefore,  no  authority  for  that 
doctrine.  But  it  does  resemble  the  doctrine ;  for  there 
is  in  regeneration  an  arising  and  a  departing  from 
an  old  state  to  a  new,  and  at  the  command  of  God. 


y 


Il6         THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.     l^ect.  vm 


This  text,  therefore,  may  be  made  to  suggest  the  doc« 
trine  of  regeneration,  by  accommodation.  It  resembles 
that  from/ which  it  is  radically  different. 

Acc^i^modated  texts  may  be  of  three  kinds.  One 
kind  is  where  the  resemblance  between  text  and  theme 
is  only  in  sound.  Thus  an  Episcopal  preacher  dis- 
coursed oij  the  observance  of  Ash  Wednesday,  from 
th3  text,  "I  have  eaten  ashes  like  bread."  Another 
preached  on  the  duties  of  judges,  from  the  text, 
"  Judge  not,  that  ye  be  not  judged." 

Another  kind  of  accommodated  text  is  one  in  which 
the  accommodation  is  founded  on  a  metaphorical  resem- 
blance; and  this,  again,  may  be  twofold.  A  literal 
J^xt  may  be  used  metaphorically.  A  sermon  was  once 
preached  on  the  truth  that  "  depravity  pervades  the 
moral  virtues  of  man."  The  text  was,  "  Now,  in  the 
place  where  he  was  crucified,  there  was  a  garden ;  and 
in  the  garden  a  new  sepulcher,"  —  a  literal,  narrative 
text  used  figuratively  to  express  a  doctrine  of  religion. 
A  metaphorical  text,  again,  may  be  used  as  figurative 
qf^a^different  se_nse_from  that  of  the  original.  INIany 
sermons  have  been  preached  on  the  text,  "Look  .  .  . 
to  the  hole  of  the  pit  whence  ye  are  digged,"  from 
which  preachers  derive  the  duty  of  Christians  to  re- 
member the  depraved  state  from  which  they  have  been 
redeemed.  This  passage  is  figurative  in  the  original ; 
but  not  at  all  figurative  of  any  allusion  to  depravity. 
It  refers  to  God's  dealings  with  the  Hebrew  nation :  it 
pictures  their  origin  as  a  people.  The  figure  in  the 
original  is  not  a  pit,  but  a  quarry.  The  sentiment  is, 
thei^ef ore,  "remember  your  national  infancy,  and  the 
labor  bestowed  on  your  national  training.  You  were 
once  a  rough,  unhewn  block :  remember  that."  Yet,  by 
a  change  in  the  character  of  the  metaphor,  tliis  is  i  \a-de 


v^ 


UBCT.  VIII.]  THE  TEXT :    ACCOMMODATION.  117 

a  text  on  individual  depravity.  Prof  ess  jr  Longfellow, 
in  one  of  his  works,  introduces  a  preacher,  whom  he 
represents  as  discoursing  on  autumn  from  the  text, 
*'  Who  is  this  that  cometh  from  Edom,  with  dyed  gar- 
ments  from  Bozrah?"  This  passage  is  figurative  in 
the  original ;  but  the  metaphor  is  referred  by  commen- 
tators diversely  either  to  God  or  to  Christ.  It  has,  at 
least,  no  inspired  reference  to  the  autumnal  foliage :  it 
can  be  so  applied  only  on  the  ground  of  metaphorical 
resemblance. 

Still  another  kind  of  accommodation  of  texts  is  on 
the  ground  of  resemblance  in  principle ;  that  is,  the 
principle  in  the  text  resembles  the  principle  of  the  sub- 
ject, but  is  radically  distinct  from  it.  The  words  of  the 
text,  therefore,  will  express  the  principle  of  the  subject^ 
perhaps  equally  well  with  that  of  their  true  meaning. 
For  example.  Dr.  South  has  a  sermon  on  preparation  for 
the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  of  which  the  text 
is,  "Friend,  how  camest  thou  in  hither,  not  having  a 
wedding-garment  ?  "  Here  is  resemblance  between  text 
and  theme,  not  merely  in  sound,  not  only  by  metaphor, 
but  in  principle.  Yet  text  and  theme  are  radically 
distinct.  Dr.  Blair  has  a  sermon  on  the  importance 
of  time,  which  he  derives,  by  this  kind  of  accommoda- 
tion, from  the  inquiry  of  Pharaoh  addressed  to  Jacob, 
"How  old  art  thou?"  A  preacher  in  Maine,  by  the 
same  kind  of  accommodation,  preached  upon  the  prin 
ciple  of  subjecting  the  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks  to 
the  Maine  law,  which  he  derived  from  a  passage  in 
Esther,  "And  the  drinking  was  according  to  the  law." 
These  three  kinds  of  accommodation  should  be  remem- 
bered; for  upon  them  depends  the  whole  question  of 
the  propriety  of  accommodated  texts. 

We  are  now  prepared  to  answer  the  question.  May 


<7 


118  /        THE  THEORY  OF  PKEACHINg/         [lect.  viu.     ^"^(^ 

/'  a  preacher  use  an  accommodated  text  ?  The  abuses  of 
accommodation  have  been  such,  that  many  of  the  more 
manly  of  the  ministry  have  said,  without  qualification, 
"  No :  let  us  have  none  of  this  puerility."  But  I  think ' 
that  a  little  discrimination  will  show  that  the  question 
must  be  answered  variously.  Do  not  the  following 
positions  commend  themselves  to  a  manly  taste  ? 
Y*  J  ELcst,  accommodation  of  texts  on  the  ground  of 
^y  resemblance  in  sound  is  puerile.  A  manly  culture 
j^,  revolts  from  it.  It  degrades  the  Bible.  It  places  texts 
^  on  the  same  level  of  rhetorical  character  with  puns. 
Rejecting  this  kind  of  accommodation,  we  should  con- 
demn all  forced  applications  of  scriptural  names  of  per- 
sons and  places.  It  was  a  frivolity  worthy  of  a  pope, 
that  Pius  VI.  should  flatter  an  Austrian  general  whose 
name  was  John,  by  preaching  a  sermon  in  honor  of  a 
victory  which  the  general  had  gained,  choosing  for  a 
text,  ''  There  was  a  man  sent  from  God,  and  his  name 
was  John."  It  was  an  impertinence  of  which  none  but 
an  idle  mind  would  have  been  guilty,  that  a  preacher, 
living  no  matter  where,  saluted  an  unruly  parishioner 
whose  name  was  Ephraim,  on  the  Sabbath  after  his 
marriage,  by  choosing  for  the  text  of  the  morning  ser 
mon  the  words,  "Ephraim  is  joined  to  idols;  let  him 
alone."  These  are  specimens  of  a  most  unscholarly 
and  unmanly  taste,  which  has  made  the  pulpit  noto- 
rious. We  owe  a  vast  amount  of  it  which  still  degrades 
the  clergy  to  the  mental  idleness  of  the  Romisli  priest- 
hood. A  mind  which  feels  that  it  has  any  thing  else 
to  do  will  not,  without  violence  to  itself,  stoop  to  this 
play  upon  a  jew's-harp. 

Further :  accommodation  on  the  ground  of  metaphor- 
ical resemblance  is  also  to  be  condemned.  Some  exam- 
ples  of    it  may   appear  plausible ;    but  the   principle 


h 


LECT.  vni.j  THE  TEXT :    ACCOMMODATION.  119 

involved  in  it  is  always  the  same.  Such  accommoda- 
tion is  not  natural  to  a  well-trained  mind  when  that 
mind  is  in  earnest.  It  belongs  to  a  sportive  or  a  fanci- 
'ful  state  of  mental  activity.  Least  of  all  is  it  becoming 
to  the  use  of  a  volume  so  burdened  with  thought  as  is 
the  Bible.  Some  examples  of  this  kind  of  accommoda* 
tion  are  even  more  objectionable,  because  more  elabo- 
rate, than  the  accommodation  by  jew's-harp,  which  we 
have  already  condemned.  Can  you  conceive  of  a  more 
ridiculous  combination  than  the  following,  from  one  of 
the  old  preachers  ?  He  adopted  the  distinction  between  \ 
clean  and  unclean  beasts  under  the  Levitical  law  as  '' 
emblematic  of  the  distinction  between  Christians  and 
sinners,  after  this  fashion:  "The  clean  beasts  divided 
the  hoof ;  so  Christians  believe  in  the  Father  and  the 
Son :  clean  beasts  were  those  who  chewed  the  cud ;  so 
Christians  meditate  on  the  law :  sinners  do  neither  of 
these  things,  and  therefore  are  unclean  beasts." 

Even  the  best  specimens  of  this  kind  of  accommoda- 
tion are  objectionable.  For  instance,  Massillon,  whose 
taste  was  sadly  corrupted  by  his  Romish  inheritance  in  ) 
culture,  selects  the  text,  "  In  these  lay  a  great  multi- 
tude of  impotent  folk,  of  blind,  halt,  and  withered ;  "  a 
purely  literal,  historical  text,  as  it  stands  in  the  Bible ; 
but  Massillon  accommodates  it,  on  the  ground  of  meta- 
phorical resemblance,  to  three  distinct  classes  of  reli- 
gious characters.  Under  the  head  of  "the  blind"  ho 
considers  those  who  are  deficient  in  religious  kncwl- 
edge ;  under  the  head  of  "  the  halt,"  those  who  are 
insincere  in  confession ;  and,  under  the  head  of  "  the 
withered,"  those  who  have  no  sorrow  in  repentance. 

We  feel  without  argument  the  levity  of  such  uses 
of  the  Bible  as  these  ;  but  why  are  they  not,  in  princi- 
ple, as  worthy  of  commendation  as  thafoUowing,  wMcyb 


''fi  ,fe^.  7*r^"  Z'«-^  ^t^' 


120  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  vm 

is  a  specimen  of  a  large  class  of  very  plausible  conceits 
which  have  frittered  away  much  of  the  dignity  of  texts  ? 
A  preacher  chose  for  his  text  the  words,  "  Abide  with 
us,  for  it  is  toward  evening,  and  the  day  is  far  spent; " 
and  he  accommodated  it  to  this  theme,  "  the  necessity 
of  drawing  near  to  Christ  in  hours  of  trouble  and  dark 
ness."  The  whole  usage  of  the  pulpit  by  which  metar 
phorical  resemblance  is  tolerated  as  the  ground  of 
accommodation  is  false  in  principle,  and  puerile  in 
taste.  As  culture  advances,  taste  condemns  it ;  and  as 
piety  grows  in  alliance  with  culture,  the  heart  revolts 
from  it.  There  is  no  Christian  good  sense  in  it.  It 
holds  the  Bible  at  arm's-length.  It  is  sympathetic  with 
a  reliprioujrF  thft  faiicy  rather  than  with  a  religion  of 
the  reason  andjthg^^conscience.  One  is  not  surprised  to 
find  it  rife" in  the  Romish  pulpit:  it  is  at  home  there. 
That  superficial  religious  culture,  and  that  idleness  of 
mind  which  can  amuse  itself  with  subjecting  the  salva- 
tion of  a  soul  to  the  cut  of  a  surplice,  are  in  perfect 
affinity  with  this  frivolous  method  of  using  the  word  of 
God.  Yet  a  considerable  part  of  the  literature  of  the 
Protestant  pulpit  is  infected  with  the  same  abuse ;  and 
many  Protestant  commentators  have  encouraged  it  by 
cultivating  the  taste  for  "  spiritualizing  "  the  Scriptures. 
The  accommodation  of  texts  on  the  ground  of  resem- 
blance in  principle  between  the  text  and  the  theme  is 
admissible.  William  Jay  preached  a  ssrmon  on  a 
national  jubilee  appointed  in  England  on  the  occasion 
of  the  king's  entering  the  fiftieth  year  of  his  reign.  His 
text  was  taken  from  Leviticus,  "It  shall  be  a  jubilee 
unto  you."  President  Davies  of  Virginia  preached  a 
discourse  on  a  New- Year's  Day,  and  selected  as  hia 
text  the  words  of  Jeremiah  to  the  false  prophet  Hana- 
niah,  "  This  year  thou  shalt  die."      Dr.  Hitchcock  of 


iLx 


mKCT.  mi.J         THE  TEXT:    ACCOMMODATION.  121 

Amiierst  has  a  sermon  on  the  text,  "  Behold  an  Isra- 
elite indaed,  in  whom  is  no  guile."  His  subject  is, 
"certain  mineralogical  illustrations  of  character."  In 
each  of  these  cases  the  subject  of  the  text  is  not  the 
subject  of  the  sermon.  The  text  can  not  logically  be 
made  to  cover  the  sermon ;  yet  there  is  more  than 
resemblance  in  sound  or  figure ;  there  is  resemblance 
in  principle.  Even  this  kind  of  accommodation  may 
be  abused ;  but  its  right  use  is  defensible  on  several 
grounds.  ^ 

Such  accommodation  is  a  natural  use  of  a  text.  Our  ^/ 
minds  are  so  made,  that  similar  principles  suggest  each 
other.  If,  then,  the  same  language  may  express  either, 
it  is  not  unnatural  to  a  manly  train  of  thought  to  use 
that  language  by  transfer  from  one  to  the  other.  Fur- 
ther, it  is  a  scriptural  use  of  a  text.  Passages  from 
the  Old  Testament  are  sometimes  quoted  in  the  New 
Testament,  introduced  by  the  phrase  iva  7tlj]pmdtj,  on  no 
other  principle  than  this  of  accommodation.  The  quo- 
tation is  transferred  from  its  original  sense  to  another, 
which  that  sense  resembles,  but  from  which  it  is  dis- 
tinct. Again :  it  is  often  a 
So  far  from  detracting  from  the 

abused,  it  augments  that  value,  through  the  interest 
which  the  mind  feels  in  the  discovery  of  resemblance, 
Tliis  interest  is  similar  to  that  which  attends  the  method 
of  teaching  by  parables.  What  is  a  parable  ?  It  is  a 
narrative  illustrating  a  truth  by  means  of  resemblance. 
The  language  has  its  narrative  sense,  and  yet  is  applied 
in  a  didactic  sense  on  the  ground  of  resemblance  of 
cases.  The  hypothetical  case  resembles  the  real  one. 
The  conduct  of  the  ten  vu'gins  was  not  identical  with 
that  of  men  under  the  conditions  of  probation,  but  it 
was  similar.     The  theft  of  the  ewe  lamb  was  not  the 


ut  from  which  it  is  dis-  | 

pleasinp^   use  of  a  text.   \0/ 
le  value  of  a  text,  if  not    / 


122  THE  THEORY  OF  PEE  ACHING.  [lbct.  vm 

same  as  the  sin  of  David,  but  it  was  like  it.  Once 
more :  this  is  oftenanecfissar^Llise  of  a  text.  Subjects 
must  be  discussedln  the  pulpit  which  can  not  be  intro- 
duced by  a  text  in  auy  other  way,  and  yet  retain  the 
significance  of  the  custom  of  employing  texts.  Which 
is  better,  —  to  introduce  the  duty  of  sinners  to  seek  eter- 
nal life  in  company  with  Christians  by  the  text,  "  He 
that  hath  an  ear  let  him  hear ;  "  or  by  the  text,  "  Come 
thou  with  us,  and  we  will  do  thee  good  "  ?  Respecting 
many  themes,  we  have  no  range  of  choice.  We  must 
do  one  of  three  things,  —  we  must  preach  without  a  text, 
or  we  must  take  a  general  text,  which  as  a  text  means 
nothing,  or  we  must  select  an  accommodated  text. 

For  these  reasons  we  accept  the  usage  of  accommo- 
dating texts  on  the  ground  of  resemblance  in  principle, 
but  reject  all  accommodation  on  the  ground  of  resem- 
blance in  sound  or  in  metaphor.  Yet  even  this  re- 
stricted usage  is  liable  to  abuse.  We  shall  therefore 
consider  in  the  next  lecture  certain  cautions  to  be 
observed  in  the  use  of  accommodated  texts. 


LECTURE  IX. 

THE  text:   accommodation,  mottoes,  MISCELLANIEa 

It  has  been  observed,  that,  in  the  use  of  accommo- 
dated texts,  certam  cautions  are  necessary.  Of  these, 
the  first  is  that  we  should  not  select  accommodated 
texts  when  logical  texts  can  be  found.  Why  do  we 
need  an  indirect  authority  for  a  theme  when  a  direct 
one  is  at  command  ?  Why  should  we  be  content  with  a 
hint  of  a  subject  when  an  expression  of  it  is  practicable  ? 
We  sport  with  a  truth  which  we  seek  to  introduce  by 
needless  circumlocution.  Earnest  processes  of  mind 
are  always  as  direct  as  they  can  be  without  hazard  to 
their  object.  The  pulpit  suffers  in  its  reputation  for 
manliness,  and  it  deserves  to  suffer,  if  it  is  tempted  into 
dalliance  with  truth  for  the  gratification  of  a  fancy  for 
a  text.  Why  should  we  discourse  upon  the  parental 
love  of  God  from  the  narrative  of  Jacob's  affection  for 
Joseph,  or  of  Abraham's  for  Isaac,  when  we  have  a  text 
which  seems  as  if  inspired  for  our  purpose:  "If  ye, 
then,  being  evil,  know  how  to  give  good  gifts  unto  your 
children,  how  much  more  shall  your  heavenly  Father 
give  the  Holy  Spirit  to  them  that  ask  him?"  Why 
should  we  choose  as  the  text  of  a  sermon  on  the  abso- 
luteness of  human  obligation  to  God  the  words,  "  How 
much  owest  thou  unto  my  lord  ?  "  when  we  have  such 
a  text  as  this  by  the  side  of  it,  "  When  ye  shall  have 

123 


L-^) 


I 


124  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lectt.  lx 

done  all  tliose  things  which  are  commanded  you,  say, 
We  are  unprcfitable  servants:  we  have  done  that 
which  was  our  djty  to  do"?  If  we  gain  nothing  by 
an  accommodated  text,  we  may  be  assured  that  we 
lose  something.  Intrinsically,  the  logical  text  is  the 
superior. 

From  this  it  follows  that  we  should  not  generally 
choose  accommodated  texts.  This  is  oil'e  form  of  abuse 
of -this  usage  of  the  pulpit,  —  that  preachers  are  ser- 
vants to  their  fancy  in  the  selection  of  texts,  and 
therefore  they  preach  disproportionately  upon  those 
which  are  not,  logically,  sources  of  their  themes.  It  is 
no  defense  of  such  disproportion  to  say  that  the  themes 
have  no  logical  texts,  and  therefore  the  accommoda- 
tion is  a  necessity.  It  is  so  much  the  worse  for  the 
themes  then.  That  is  a  distorted  minir.try  which  deals 
in  any  large  proportion  with  subjects  which  are  not 
iOgically  presented  in  the  Scriptures.  It  is  not  a  bib- 
lical ministry. 

A  regard  for  biblical  authority  requires,  moreover, 
that  we  should  not  accommodate  passages  in  such  a 
way  as  ^to  distort  or  degrade  their  biblical  associations. 
This  may  be  done,  even  when  a  remote  resemblance  in 
principle  exists  between  text  and  theme.  Bishop  Lati- 
mer once  preached  a  discourse  on  the  text,  "  Who  art 
thou  ?  "  The  interrogation  was  originally  addressed  by 
the  Pharisees  to  our  Saviour.  But  Latimer  employs  it 
as  a  monitory  inquiry  addressed  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to 
sinners.  He  asks,  "  Who  art  thou  ?  "  and  answers,  "  A 
lost  sinner ;  "  and,  again,  "  Who  art  thou  ?  "  and  replies, 
"  A  redeemed  sinner."  The  sermon  is  a  series  of  such 
repetitions  of  the  query,  with  admonitory  responses. 
Phis  is  accommodation  on  the  ground  of  some  distant 
resemblance  of  text  to  theme  in  point  of  meaning ;  but 


•■^-* 


LBCT   Tx.]  THE  TEXT:    ACCOMMODATION.  126 

it  is  fanciful,  because  it  distorts  the  associations  of  the 
text.  Distortion  of  the  biblical  associations  of  texts 
sometimes  takes  the  form  of  transposing  classes  of 
hearers  to  whom  texts  are  supposed  to  be  addressed ; 
that  is,  addressing  to  Christians  language  which  origi- 
nally is  addressed  to  sinners,  and  vice  versa.  Such 
transposition  is  not  always  a  distortion  of  a  text„ 
Sometimes  the  truth  declared  is  naturall}/  applicable 
to  both  classes,  though  addressed  to  one ;  but  in  other 
cases  a  text  has  become  localized  in  the  midst  of  certain 
surroundings  in  a  hearer's  mind,  so  that  no  preacher  of 
good  taste  would  disturb  those  associations.  On  this 
ground  we  must  condemn  the  choice  of  a  clergyman 
who  once  preached  on  the  text,  "  One  thing  thou  lack- 
est,"  and  accommodated  it  to  a  discourse  on  the  defi- 
ciencies of  Christians.  Are  we  not  sensible  of  a  vio- 
lence done  to  the  biblical  associations  of  a  text  in  this 
case? 

Yet  sometimes  the  danger  is  not  only  this,  but  of  an 
absolute  destruction  of  a  text  in  its  biblical  signifi- 
cance. I  remark,  therefore,  that  we  should  not  accom- 
modate passages,  which,  by  frequent  accommodation, 
are  in  danger  of  losing  their  true  meaning  in  the  minds 
of  hearers.  The  necessity  of  this  caution  will  be  evi- 
dent from  an  illustration.  The  text,  '^Watchmafi, 
what  of  the  night  ?  "  is  one  of  the  standards  of  tlie 
pulpit ;  but  who  of  the  people  knows  its  legitimate 
meaning  ?  The  pulpit  has  appropriated  it  almost  uni- 
versally to  sermons  on  the  "  signs  of  the  times."  If  a 
preacher  wishes  to  discourse  upon  the  prospects  of 
missions,  or  the  prospects  of  reform,  or  the  prospects 
3f  the  nation,  he  turns  to  this  as  the  most  convenient 
passage  in  the  Bible,  because  it  seems  to  restrict  dis- 
cussion tc  nothing  in  particular.     But  in  fact  it  is  one 


y".  ^' 


/-■ 


126  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lbct.  a. 

of  tlie  most  individual  and  restricted  of  all  texts.  In 
its  biblical  significance  it  is  a  taunt  of  infidelity.  The 
prophet  is  represented  as  stationed  in  a  watch-tower,  in 
a  time  of  great  peril,  on  the  lookout  for  friend  or  foe. 
Tlie  triumphant  Idumsean  is  then  represented  as  pa-i^sing 
along,  and  crying  out  in  derision  of  the  solitary  senti- 
nel. The  elocution  of  the  passage  ought  to  express 
this  derision.  It  is  as  if  the  Idumsean  stranger  spoke 
thus,  "  Ha,  ha,  watchman  I  how  do  you  like  the  look 
of  the  night?"  A  sermon  on  this  text,  designed  to 
develop  the  taunting  spirit  of  infidelity  in  a  time  of 
misfortune  to  the  cause  of  Christ,  might  disclose  the 
significance  of  the  language  with  great  force.  But  the 
passage  is  scarcely  known  to  the  people  in  any  such 
use  of  it.  Such  a  discourse  upon  it  would  be  a  novelty. 
Preachers  generally  have  used  the  text  as  it  is  used  in 
the  missionary  hymn  founded  upon  it  by  Bo  wring :  — 

"  Watchman,  tell  us  of  the  night, 
What  its  signs  of  promise  are." 

That  hymn  and  the  usage  of  the  pulpit  have  almost 
destroyed  that  text  in  the  minds  of  the  people.  Such 
texts  as  this  ought  not  to  be  accommodated  by  the 
present  generation  of  preachers.  They  have  been 
wrenched  out  of  place  in  the  popular  thought  of  them. 
They  are  almost  lifeless.  They  should  be  permitted  to 
rest  from  accommodated  uses  till  they  have  recovered 
their  biblical  force. 

(4)  Similar  to  this  inquiry  concerning  accommodated 
texts,  yet  distinct  from  it,  is  a  fourth  inquiry  affecting 
the  relation  of  the  text  to  the  sermon.  It  is,  May 
preachers  properly  employ  motto-texts  ? 

What  is  a  motto-text?  It  is  not  necessarily  an 
accommodated   text.     The    subject   may  be   a   logical 


\yf 


■L^y^^f-z 


a^^/t 


UBOT.  IX.]  THE  TEXT :    MOTTOES.  127 

deduction  from  a  motto-text :  it  can  not  be  such  from 
an  accommodated  text.  For  example,  "  The  field  is 
the  world "  may  be  a  motto-text  for  a  sermon  on  the 
conversion  of  Madagascar  to  Christianity,  but  it  can 
not  be  accommodated  to  that  subject.  The  subject  is 
logically  related  to  the  text.  Again :  a  text  to  which 
no  expressed  reference  is  made  in  the  discussion  is  not 
necessarily  a  motto-text.  "  What  shall  a  man  give  in 
exchange  for  his  soul?"  may  be  the  text  of  a  sermon 
in  which  the  text  is  not  once  repeated,  or  expressly 
i-eferred  to,  throughout  the  entire  discussion;  yet  it 
Dxay  not  be  a  motto. 

A  motto  implies  two  things,  —  remoteness  of  con- 
nection between  the  text  and  the  theme,  ai^dlndepend- 
ence  of  the  text  in  the  discussion  of  the  theme. 
Observe  one  or  two  illustrations.  Upon  the  text, 
"  That  the  soul  be  without  knowledge  it  is  not  good," 
Professor  Park  once  preached  a  sermon  on  the  value 
of  theological  seminaries.  In  tliis  case,  the  text  con- 
tained a  principle.  From  that  principle  the  theme  was 
a  remote  inference.  No  further  use  was  made  of  the 
text  than  to  introduce  that  inference,  ^rom  the  text, 
**  Prove  all  things,  hold  fast  that  which  is  good,"  the 
late  Professor  Edwards  once  preached  a  discourse  on 
the  state  of  the  Roman  Catholic  religion  in  Italy. 
On  the  following  Sabbath,  in  the  same  pulpit,  a  sermon 
from  the  same  text  was  preached  on  education  socie- 
ties. In  these  instances,  the  text  was  a  command  to 
which  the  sermons  were  acts  of  obedience;  yet  no 
mention  waa  made  of  the  text  after  the  subjects  were 
announced.  These  were  not  accommodated  texts. 
Why?  Because  the  connection  was  logical  between 
text  and  theme.  Yet  they  were  not  suggestive  texts 
as  related  to  the  themes.     Why  ?     because  the  cc^inec- 


V 


X28  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lkot.  ix 

tion  between  theme  and  text  was  remote.  Neither 
were  they  suggestive  of  the  discussion,  nor  the  discus- 
sion of  them.  Why  ?  Because  the  discussion  proceeded 
independently  of  tlie  text. 

Yet,  again,  a  text  may  be  both  a  motto  and  an  accom- 
modated text.  Some  years  ago,  on  the  occasion  of  a 
famine  in  Ireland,  a  charity-sermon  was  preached  iii 
Boston  from  the  text,  "  I  saw  the  tents  of  Cushan  in 
affliction."  This  was  an  accommodated  text :  the  sub- 
ject of  the  original  does  not  contain  at  all  the  subject 
of  the  sermon.  The  text  was  applied  to  the  sermon 
only  on  the  ground  of  resemblance  in  thought.  But 
it  was  also  a  motto-text :  no  use  could  be  made  of  it 
in  the  discussion  of  the  theme.  It  represents  an  extreme 
class,  yet  not  a  small  one,  of  instances  in  which  the 
liberty  of  the  pulpit  takes  the  broadest  range. 

It  is  very  popular  to  condemn  the  use  of  motto-texts, 
and  for  reasons  which  are  not  without  force.  It  is 
urged  that  it  is  trifling  with  the  Scriptures  to  choose 
a  text,  and  then  abandon  it :  the  text  is  said  to  be,  in 
such  a  case,  only  a  pretext :  therefore  it  is  said  to  be 
unfavorable  to  evangelical  preaching  to  employ  motto- 
texts.  We  often  hear  objection  made  to  them  as  facil- 
itating literature  or  philosophy  at  the  expense  of  the 
gospel.  These  are  valid  objections  to  the  use  of  n:ot- 
toes  in  preaching,  but  they  are  not  conclusive.  A 
decisive  argument  can  be  advanced  in  defense  of  such 
texts.  Of  this,  one  consideration  is  that  the  exclusion 
of  mottoes  would  restrict  injuriously  the  range  of  the 
topics  of  the  pulpit.  Such  texts  are  a  necessity  to  any 
broad  compass  of  thought  in  preaching.  Combinations 
of  truth  are  suggested  by  the  wants  of  a  modern  con- 
gregation which  no  text  of  the  Bible  will  express,  and 
which  none  will  inclose  otherwise  than  by  remote  rela- 


LBJCT.  IX.]  THE  TEXT :   MOTTOES.  129 

tion.  Occidental  civilization  renders  some  discussiona 
needful  which  were  not  needed  in  patriarchal  or  apo* 
tolic  times,  and  for  which,  therefore,  the  Scriptures 
contain  no  forcible  texts.  Modern  methods  of  useful- 
ness are  affected  by  modern  inventions.  The  invention 
of  printing  has  created  tract  societies,  for  instance. 
Are  not  they  a  suitable  theme  for  a  sermon?  Yet 
where  is  the  text  which  names  or  implies  this  depart- 
ment of  religious  action  otherwise  than  by  remote  sug- 
gestion ? 

Modern  theological  discussions  render  necessary  some 
combinations  of  truth  in  preaching  which  were  not 
needed  at  Ephesus  or  at  Rome  in  the  ministrations  of 
St.  Paul.  We  can  find  no  texts  for  them  other  than 
mottoes.  The  local  history  of  a  parish  may  create  an 
occasional  need  of  certain  methods  of  discourse,  which 
no  inspired  thought  embraces  otherwise  than  by  a  gen- 
eral principle,  that  reaches  the  exact  case  of  that  parish, 
two  thousand  years  later,  only  by  remote  connection. 
Shall  these  modern,  occidental,  local,  in  every  way 
peculiar  needs  of  a  congregation  be  neglected  for  the 
want  of  texts  by  which  a  preacher  can  meet  those 
needs  textually  ?  So  far  from  promoting  the  evangel- 
ical spirit  of  the  pulpit,  such  a  principle  would  restrain 
and  cripple  that  spirit.  As  a  book  of  texts,  the  Bible  is 
made  for  the  pulpit,  not  the  pulpit  for  the  Bible.  We 
must  have  freedom,  or  we  can  not  have  life,  in  the 
adaptation  of  texts  to  subjects. 

Another  consideration  in  the  defense  of  motto-texts 
is  that  they  are  a  less  evil  than  a  forced  intimacy  be- 
tween text  and  sermon  would  be.  An  artifice  to  which 
some  preachers  resort  to  avoid  the  appearance  of  having 
a  motto-text  is  to  foist  the  text  into  the  sermon  by  re 
peating  it  at  everv  convenient  landing-place.     Another 


11 


130  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  ix 

artifice  of  this  kind  is  to  dwell  upon  the  text  by  point- 
ing out  forced  resemblances  between  it  and  the  train 
of  thought  in  the  sermon.  One  need  scarcely  say  that 
these  artifices  are  unmanly.  We  see  them  to  be  so 
when  they  are  stated  in  form.  They  are  among  the 
tricks  of  composition  to  which  no  manly  mind  will 
stoop  consciously.  But,  as  with  some  of  the  more 
venial  faults  of  composition,  we  fall  into  them  uncou- 
Bciously.  We  need,  therefore,  to  define  such  artifices 
as  these  to  our  own  criticism,  and  see  that  they  are  in 
bad  taste,  that  they  are  worse  logic,  and  that,  most 
of  all,  they  are  miserable  exegesis.  Admitting  that  a 
motto-text  is  an  evil,  it  is  a  less  evil  than  an  unnatural 
connection  of  text  and  theme. 

A  third  consideration  in  defense  of  motto-texts  is 
that  tjiey  are  a  less  evil  than  accommodated  texts.  It 
is  a  singular  fact  that  the  very  taste  which  declaims 
against  the  irreverence  of  using  mottoes  in  the  pulpit  is 
especially  fond  of  the  accommodation  of  the  Scriptuies 
to  uninspired  trains  of  thought.  The  most  unnatural 
conceits  of  the  pulpit  have  been  attempts  to  spirit- 
ualize passages  which  had  no  religious  thought  in  them. 
But  which  is  the  worse,  —  to  choose  a  text  which  logi- 
cally contains  the  theme,  and  then  discuss  the  theme 
independently  of  the  text,  or  to  choose  a  text  which 
contains  neither  discussion  nor  theme,  except  as  the 
preacher  puts  them  there  ?  Which  is  the  more  irrev- 
erent, —  to  neglect  a  text,  or  to  force  into  it  unin- 
spired contents?  The  truth  is,  that,  under  proper 
restrictions,  neither  is  an  act  of  irreverence.  But,  of 
the  two,  the  use  of  the  motto  is  the  more  vigorous 
expedient.  It  is  less  liable  to  abuse;  it  has  created 
less  abuse  of  the  usages  of  the  pulpit  than  have  the 
ooaceits   of  accommodation.     Yet   the    clerical    taste 


LBCT.  IX.]  IHE  TEXT:    MOTTOES.  131 

wLich   has   rioted  in  these  has  been  offended  at  the 
motto. 

But  if  mottoes,  in  this  view  of  them,  seem  to  be  a 
necessity,  they  suggest  the  question.  Is  it  invariably 
necessary  to  have  a  text  ?  This  leads  me  to  remark  a 
fourth  consideration  in  vindication  of  motto-texts,  that 
they  are  a  less  evil  than  to  preach,  even  occasion- 
ally, without  a  text.  It  seems  plausible  to  ask.  If  a 
text  is  not  needed  in  a  discussion,  why  have  a  text  for 
the  theme?  But  the  objection  will  not  stand  the  test 
of  practice.  A  custom  like  this  of  building  the  pulpit 
upon  divine  foundations  will  not  bear  tampering  with. 
An  invasion  of  it  occasionally  invites  a  longer  suspen- 
sion of  it,  and  a  suspension  tempts  to  an  abandonment. 
The  custom  as  it  stands  ogives  a  valuable  advantage 
to  evangelical  preachers.  It  is  a  silent  but  powerful_ 
check  upon  a  heretical  pulpit,  that  usage  requires  its 
ministrations  to  be  founded  on  inspired  texts:  it  is 
compelled  to  use  a  volume  which  is  its  own  refutation. 
This  is  too  great  an  advantage  to  the  truth  to  be  lightly 
thrown  away.  Let  an  evangelical  ministry  allow  oc- 
casional departures  from  the  usage,  and  we  may  rest 
assured  that  preachers  of  error  will  very  speedily  widen 
the  breach.  They  will  often  preach  without  texts; 
they  will  choose  texts  from  uninspired  sources ;  event- 
ually they  will  abandon  the  custom,  as  Voltaire  ad- 
vised. 

The  liberty  we  claim,  however,  is  obviously  liable  to  ■ 
abuses.  We  should,  therefore,  observe  certain  restric- 
tions in  the  use  of  motto-texts.  Of  these,  one  is  that 
mottoes  should  not  be  needlessly  chosen.  If  passages 
can  be  found  which  are  exactly  fitted  to  the  demands 
of  a  discussion,  they  should  always  have  the  preference. 
Another  restriction  is  that  mottoes  should  not  be  gen* 


H 


132  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  ix 

erally  chosen  as  texts.  Here,  as  in  the  case  of  accom- 
modated texts,  it  proves  a  fault  in  a  preaclier's  range  o^ 
themes  and  methods  of  discussion,  if  his  texts  are  in 
large  proportion  mere  mottoes  of  his  sermons.  The 
proportion  is,  probably,  the  exact  proportion  in  which 
his  trains  of  thought  are  but  distantly  related  to  the 
Scriptures.  A  third  restriction  is  that  we  should,  if 
possible,  refrain  from  employing  as  mottoes  texts  which 
are  seldom  employed  in  any  othei  way.  Some  passages 
have  been  standard  mottoes  for  ages.  "  The  field  is  the 
world"  has  been  the  motto  of  missionary  sermons  innu- 
merable. Who  ever  heard  a  sermon  on  it  which  was 
designed  to  unfold  the  principle  of  the  text  ?  "  Glory 
to  God  in  the  highest "  has  been  persecuted  with  ser- 
mons upon  a  vast  variety  of  subjects.  So  has  the  text, 
"  Faith  Cometh  by  hearing."  A  merciful  preacher  wih 
be  merciful  to  such  texts.  It  relieves  very  much  of 
the  evil  incident  to  a  motto,  if  it  be  an  unhackneyed 


This  suggests  a  fourth  restriction,  that,  in  the  choice 
of  a  motto-text,  we  should  have  special  care  for  the 
pertinence  of  it  to  the  sermon.  An  interesting  coinci- 
dence of  text  and  theme,  though  it  be  but  momentary, 
will,  by  the  pleasure  it  gives,  balance  the  e^il  of  seem 
ing  to  neglect  the  text  in  the  discussion.  It  indicates 
care  on  a  preacher's  part :  it  shows  that  he  has  chosen 
the  motto  thoughtfully;  he  has  not  chosen  it  simply 
•out  of  deference  to  custom.  Let  us  illustrate  the  point 
of  this  restriction  by  the  contrast  of  two  examples. 
A  Sabbath-school  missionary  preached  a  discourse  in 
Richmond,  some  years  ago,  on  the  text,  "  The  field  is 
the  world."  The  object  of  the  sermon  was  to  give 
some  information  respecting  the  establishment  of  Sab- 
bath s^hoo^^  in  Minnesota.     The  result  was  the  request 


LECT.  IX.]  THE  TEXT :    MOTTOES.  13S 

for  the  sum  of  twenty-five  dollars  for  a  Sabbath-school 
library.  Of  course,  the  text  was  necessarily  a  motto; 
yet  it  had  a  perfectly  logical  connection  with  the  sub- 
ject. "  The  world  "  includes  Minnesota :  the  cultivation 
of  "the  field"  includes  Sabbath  schools.  But  was  it 
a  becoming  text?  Was  it  an  interesting  text?  Did 
it  add  any  thing  to  the  force  of  the  sermon  ?  Did  it 
suggest  any  pleasing  answer  to  the  q[uestion,  Why  did 
the  preacher  have  a  text  ?  Did  it  not  leave  bare  the 
fact  that  he  chose  a  text  out  of  deference  to  usag*^, 
and  for  no  other  purpose  ? 

In  the  same  pulpit,  at  about  the  same  time,  a  clergy- 
man preached  in  behalf  of  the  Waldenses.  His  object 
was  to  give  the  most  recent  intelligence  concerning  the 
state  of  that  people,  and  to  ask  a  contribution  to  the 
supply  of  their  wants.  He  must,  of  course,  select  sk 
motto-text.  He  had  recently  visited  the  Waldense?> 
and  had  been  requested  by  them  to  present  their  good 
wishes  to  the  American  churches.  He  accordingly 
availed  himself  of  this  coincidence  between  his  own 
experience  and  that  of  St.  Paul,  and  selected  for  his 
text  the  words  from  the  thirteenth  chapter  of  Hebrews, 
"They  of  Italy  salute  you."  This  was  both  a  motto 
and  an  accommodated  text.  It  had  no  logical  connec- 
tion with  the  subject :  it  had  no  place  whatever  in  the 
discussion.  One  can  not  conceive  of  a  wider  latitude 
between  text  and  theme.  The  case  represents  the  very 
extreme  of  usage  respecting  texts.  Still  who  will  say^ 
that  it  was  not  a  good  text  ?  Did  it  not  furnish  a  sat- 
isfactory  answer  to  the  question.  Why  did  the  preach 
er  choose  a  text  ? 

A  fifth  restriction  upon  the  use  of  motto-texts  is  that 
we  should  not  choose  them  if  we  do  not  mean  to  treat 
them  in  a  manly  way.     We  may  better  abandon  thenj 


V 


134  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  ix 

than  attempt  to  disguise  them.  We  need  not  inform 
an  audience  that  our  text  is  not  the  best  conceivable. 
The  less  we  say  of  the  processes  of  composition  in  the 
delivery  of  a  discourse,  the  better;  but  we  should 
manfully  leave  these  processes  to  disclose  themselves, 
if  hearers  have  the  skill  to  observe  them.  So  we 
should  leave  a  motto-text  to  speak  for  itself,  without 
any  effort  to  conceal  the  fact  that  it  is  a  motto.  If  we 
do  not  need  the  text  in  the  body  of  the  sermon,  we 
should  let  it  alone.  We  should  not  thrust  it  into  the 
interstices  of  the  structure,  as  if  to  remind  the  audi- 
ence, in  the  absence  of  better  evidence,  that  we  had  a 
text. 

5th,  We  have  now  considered  the  most  important 
inquiries  relating  to  the  selection  of  texts.  There  re- 
main a  few  topics,  not  of  vital  importance,  and  yet  not 
matters  of  indifference,  which  may  be  considered,  in 
the  fifth  place,  under  the  title  of  ''miscellaneous  in- 
quiries." 

(1)  Of  these,  the  first  is.  Where  should  be  the  place 
of  the  text  in  the  delivery  of  the  sermon  ?  The  Ameri- 
can and  the  German  usages,  as  you  are  aware,  differ. 
American  usage  is  almost  uniform  in  placing  the  text 
at  the  beginning  of  the  discourse.  The  German  usage 
is  not  uniform;  but,  more  frequently  than  otherwise, 
it  locates  the  text  at  the  end  of  an  introduction. 

The  German  method  has  some  advantages.  It  pre- 
ares  a  hearer's  mind  for  the  text.  Some  texts  may 
/^  yieed  such  a  preparative  process.  A  text  may  contain 
a  repulsive  doctrine.  A  preacher  may  have  reason  to 
prefer  the  conciliatory  to  the  authoritative  process  in 
discoursing  upon  that  doctrine :  therefore  he  may  deem 
it  prudent  to  introduce  the  text  with  prefatory  remarks. 
A  text  may  contain  an  offensive  simile :  a  preface  not 


tfiCT.  tx.]  THE  TEXT:   MISCELLANIES.  135 

apologetic,  but  commendatory,  may  rescue  it  from  criti- 
cism. A  text  may  excite  undue  expectations  in  an 
audience.  It  is  sometimes  expedient  to  forestall  exces- 
sive expectations  by  remarks  introducing  such  a  text. 
Again :  the  German  usage  assimilates  preaching  to  secu- 
lar oiatory.  In  itself  it  is  a  disadvantage  to  isolate 
the  pulpit.  As  it  is  against  nature  to  make  monks  of 
clergymen,  so  it  is  not  in  itself  desirable  to  separate 
preaching  from  other  methods  of  public,  oral  address. 

Further:  the  German  method  is  less  formal  than 
ours,  and  therefore  is  better  adapted  to  appeals  to  the 
feelings  of  hearers.  In  this  respect  it  is  well  fitted 
to  the  character  of  the  German  pulpit,  which  is  more 
imaginative  and  emotional,  and  less  argumentative  and 
instructive,  than  ours.  German  preachers  state  and  de- 
fine truth  less  severely  than  American  preachers ;  they 
argue  less ;  they  illustrate  and  appeal  more.  Moreover, 
the  German  method  of  locating  texts,  if  not  uniformly 
adopted,  promotes  variety  in  preaching.  Any  thing  is 
valuable  which  prevents  any  usage  of  the  pulpit  from 
crystallizing.  We  may,  therefore,  with  good  effect^ 
occasionally  adopt  the  German  form. 

But  the  American  usage  should  predominate  in  our 
practice,  and  this  for  several  reasons.  One  is  that  it  is 
the  usage  of  our  pulpit.  Another  reason  is  that  the 
American  usage  gives  greater  prominence  to  the  Scrip- 
tures than  the  German.  Something  is  gained  by  be- 
ginning discourse  with  inspired  words.  The  text  of  a 
sermon  is  like  the  title  of  a  book.  The  place  of  hoLcr, 
wherever  that  is,  is  the  ordinary  place  for  the  text. 
This  suggests,  further,  that  it  is  accordant  with  thn 
religious  feelings  of  a  preacher  commonly  to  plac(^ 
scriptural  language  before  his  own.  It  is  naturaJ  that 
we  should  follow,  rather  than  seem  to  lead,  inspired 


l36  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lbot.  ix 

thought.  Again :  the  American  method  promotes  brev 
itj  of  preliminaries.  The  danger  attends  the  German 
mode,  of  having  a  double  introduction,  —  one  for  the 
text,  and  one  for  the  subject.  This  is  often  the  fact 
in  German  preaching.  In  earnest  discussion,  and  espe- 
cially in  difficult  discussion,  such  as  is  often  heard  in 
the  American  pulpit,  economy  of  time  in  the  delivery 
of  preliminary  matter  is  a  necessity.  The  American 
custom,  therefore,  should  predominate  in  the  habits  of 
an  American  preacher;  but  an  occasional  deviation 
from  it  is  no  eccentricity,  and  may  be  an  excellence. 

(2)  A  second  miscellaneous  inquiry  is.  Should  a 
text  be  repeated  in  the  announcement?  This  is  not 
always  necessary;  the  text  may  be  short.  It  is  not 
always  convenient :  the  text  may  be  long.  No  rule  can 
be  adopted.  Sometimes  emphasis  may  require  repeti- 
tion; again,  elegance  may  forbid  it.  Why  should  we 
seek  uniformity  in  a  matter  of  this  kind  ?  Variety  is 
better. 

(3)  Another  inquiry  is.  What  should  be  the  order 
of  announcement  of  a  text?  Always  announce  chapter 
and  verse  first ;  and  this  simply  because  it  is  natural. 
When  we  quote  an  authority,  it  is  natural  to  give  the 
authority  before  we  cite  the  words.  A  text  is  an  au- 
thority quoted.  To  cite  the  language  first,  and  then 
give  the  reference,  is  always  abrupt,  sometimes  af- 
fected, and  occasionally  ludicrous. 

(4)  Another  inquiry  is.  With  what  kind  of  preface 
should  a  text  be  announced?  Have  no  rule,  except 
to  cultivate  simplicity  and  variety.  It  is  a  gross  viola- 
tion of  simplicity  to  announce  a  text  with  a  pompous  or 
long-winded  preface.  I  do  not  refer  now  to  introduc- 
tions of  texts  where  the  German  usage  is  adopted,  but 
to  the  prefatory  words  which  almost  all  preachers  use 


1,    «p_j^-Hi>V-v 


i  EOT.  IX.]  THE  TEXT :   MISCELLANIES.  137 

to  avoid  abruptness.  These  are  sometimes  offensively 
elaborate.  Have  you  never  heard  prefaces  of  texts  of 
which  this  is  a  caricature?  "You  will  find  the  par- 
ticular passage  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures  to  which  it  is 
my  present  purpose  to  invite  your  earnest  attention  on 
this  solemn  occasion,  in  that  most  interesting  and  im- 
pressive description  of  the  most  blessed  of  the  virtues, 
recorded  in  the  First  Epistle  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Corin- 
thians, in  the  thirteenth  chapter,  the  first  verse,  the  last 
clause  of  the  verse,  and  expressed  in  the  following  lan- 
guage ;  to  wit,  '  I  am  become  as  sounding  brass.' " 

I  close  these  remarks  on  the  subject  of  texts,  with  a 
statement  of  the  general  principle  upon  which  all  ques- 
tions respecting  them  should  be  determined.  It  is  that 
a  keen  sense  of  the  reverence  due  to  the  Scriptures 
should  be  associated  with  a  liberal  construction  of  rules. 
That  is  the  best  text  for  a  sermon  which  associates  it  in 
the  most  manly,  free,  and  intimate  connection  with  the 
Word  of  God. 


\ 


T 


LECTURE  X. 

rfl«  EXPLANAIION:  DEFINITION,  OBJECTS,  MA.TBRIAIA 

Having  finished  the  discussion  of  the  text  of  a  ser- 
mon, we  proceed  now  to  that  feature  of  discourse  which 
has  been  entitled  the  explanation. 

I.     What  is  the  explanation?     It  is  that  part  of  a 


sermon  which  comprehends  all  those  remarks  of  which 
the  object  is  to  adjust^  the.  meaning  of  the  text  to  the 
homiletic  use  which  is  to  be  made  of  it. 

1st,  Observe  that  it  is  notjentirely  identical  with  the 
process  by  which  we  have  characterized  an  explanatory 
sermon  All  that  is  needful  to  constitute  a  sermon  of 
that  class  is  that  the  main  process  of  it  be  explanatory 
of  something.  But  the  explanation  as  a  part  of  a 
topical  sermon  concerns  exclusively  the  text  and  its 
contemplated  uses.  It  may  not  be  the  chief  feature 
of  a  discourse :  it  may  be  the  briefest  incident  to  the 
cldef  discussion. 

2d,  Further :  the  explanation  as  executed  should  bo 
distinguished  from  the  process  of  investigation.  This 
is  self-evident  when  stated,  but  the  statement  is  essen- 
tial. Explanation,  it  should  always  be  remembered, 
is  an  after-process  to  that  of  discovery;  it  concerns 
the  results  of  investigation,  not  the  process.  The 
expounder  ceases,  for  the  time,  to  be  an  investigator. 
The  speaker  is  no  longer  a  recluse.     Some   essentials 


138 


-> 


LficT.  X.]  THE  EXPLANATION  :    DEFINITION.  139 

of  good  preaching  grow  out  of  this  truism,  and  yet  are 
often  sacrificed  by  forgetting  it. 

3d,  IMoreover,  the  explanation  in  a  sermon  is  often  \ 
distinct  from  exegesis  in  a  commentary.  These  may 
be  synonymous,  but  they  are  not  necessarily  so.  Exe- 
gesis concerns  a  text,  with  no  reference  to  its  homiletic 
uses:  the  explanation  concerns  a  text,  with  no  other 
reference  than  to  its  homiletic  uses.  It  explains  the 
text,  therefore,  only  so  far,  and  with  such  incidents  of 
illustration,  as  the  object  of  the  sermon  requires.  Its 
aim  is  to  make  the  text  useful.  Beyond  this,  the  ser- 
mon finds  no  place  for  a  text,  and  therefore  no  place 
for  its  explanation.  Exegesis,  then,  is  no  more  a  model 
for  homiletic  explanations  than  the  homiletic  explana- 
tion is  for  exegesis  in  a  commentary.  The  two  things 
differ  as  their  uses  differ. 

4th,  Moreover,  the  explanation,  as  a  part  of  a  topical 
or  a  textual  sermon,  is  distinct  from  exposition  in  an 
expository  sermon.  The  distinction  is,  that  the  one  is 
only  a  preliminary,  while  the  other  is  the  bulk  of  the 
sermon.  Rhetorically  this  distinction  is  not  radical. 
The  rhetorical  process  in  the  two  specimens  of  composi- 
tion is  the  same.  The  principles  which  we  are  about 
to  consider,  therefore,  have  a  double  importance.  They 
are  suggested  by  the  explanation  as  a  fragment  of  a 
topical  sermon ;  but  they  cover,  as  well,  the  whole  sub 
jeet  of  expository  preaching.  What  the  explanation 
in  a  toi)ical  sermon  is,  that  the  body  of  an  expository 
sermon  is,  with  this  difference  only,  that  one  is  prelimi- 
nary, and  the  other  not.  We  discuss  the  explanation, 
then,  not  merely  as  one  part  in  the  analysis  of  a  sermon, 
but  also  as  a  rhetorical  specimen  of  expository  discourse, 
I  prefer,  for  the  sake  of  rhetorical  unity,  to  discuss  the 
subject  of  expository  preaching  in  this  connection!  / 
rather  than  to  treat  it  as  a  distinct  theme.  / 


\ 


140  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [ubot.  x 

II.  We  pass,  in  the  second  place,  to  consider  more 
specifically  the  ,abjecta.of  the  explanation. 

1st,  Of  these,  may  be  named,  first,  verbal  criticism 
Certain  texts  require  this,  and  nothing  more. 
-^  Verbal  criticism  may  take  the  form  of  an  analysis 
of  the  text.  A  text  sometimes  needs  to  be  partitioned 
in  order  to  be  appreciated.  Significant  words  need 
tc  be  distinguished ;  points  of  emphasis  need  to  be 
made  obvious ;  an  ellipsis  may  need  to  be  amplified ;  a 
person  implied  may  need  to  be  expressed.  An  illus- 
tration of  some  of  these  objects  is  found  in  a  discourse 
published  by  the  late  Rev.  Dr.  Tyler  of  East  Windsor. 
On  the  text,  "  Whosoever  will,  let  him  take  the  water 
of  life  freely,"  the  preacher  proceeds  in  his  explanation 
to  inquire :  1.  Who  utters  this  language  ?  2.  What  is 
the  offer  made  in  this  language  ?  3.  On  what  condition 
is  the  offer  made  ?  Having  thus  developed  the  forcible 
points  in  the  text,  he  deduces  the  proposition  that 
nothing  hinders  the  salvation  of  any  man  but  his  own 
will.  The  explanation  here  consists  of  verbal  criticism 
in  the  form  of  an  analysis  of  the  text.  Again :  verbal 
criticism  may  be  necessary  in  the  form  of  definition. 
This  will  sometimes  be  the  object.  Mr.  Robertscm,  in 
a  sermon  on  the  text,  *' For  their  sakes  T Sanctify  my- 
self," devotes  nearly  the  whole  of  his  explanation  to  a 
definition  of  the  word  "  sanctify  "  as  applied  to  the  Son 
of  God.  His  whole  sermon  hinges  on  that  deficition. 
Again:  verbal  criticism  maybe  necessary  in  the  form 
i)f  verbal  paraphrase.  This  is  only  a  succession  of  defi- 
nitions. It  is  often  necessary  as  a  translation  from  the 
antique  dialect  of  the  Scriptures  into  the  language  of 
modern  life.  Veibal  criticism,  again,  may  be  necessary 
in  the  form  of  correction  of  the  text.  If  the  English 
version  be  wrong,  the  aim  of  the  sermon  may  require 


LKCT.  X.]  THE  EXPLANATION ;    OBJECTS.  Ill 

that  it  be  righted.  If  the  English  version  be  obscure, 
the  design  of  the  sermon  may  require  that  it  be  made 
clear. 

2d,  A  second  object  of  an  explanation  may  be  logi    ^cj^ 
cal  adjustment.  ^^^rix^eU 

The  logical  relations  of  the  text  to  the  context  ma^ 
need  to  te  adjusted.  A  text  intelligible  in  itself  maj 
seem  to  conti:adict  the  context.  It  may  seem  to  be 
irrelevant  to  the  context.  It  may  be  parenthetical. 
Its  truth  —  if  not  its  truth,  its  force ;  if  not  its  force, 
its  pertinence  —  may  depend  on  certain  logical  conaec- 
tions  with  the  context,  which  are  not  obvious.  To 
make  them  obvious  may  be  all  the  exposition  which  the 
text  demands.  The  logical  relations  of  the  text  to  other 
portions  of  the  Scriptures  than  the  context  may  require 
adjustment.  Some  passages  instantly  suggest  appar-  / 
ently  contradictory  passages.  An  explanation  achieves 
much  for  a  sermon,  if  it  makes  distant  Scriptures  but- 
tress a  text.  The  relations  of  a  text  to  arguments  con- 
firmatory of  its  interpretation  may  require  adjustment. 
Much  to  the  purpose  is  often  accomplished  by  showing 
briefly  that  a  metaphorical  text  resembles  a  similar 
metaphor  in  modern  %i8u%  loquendi.  The  protection  of 
a  text  from  a  distorted  literalism  may  depend  on  match- 
ing it  well  with  homely  examples  of  common  speech. 
The  relations  of  a  text  to  certain  intuitions  of  man 
may  need  adjustment.  One  of  the  first  duties  of  a 
preacher  is  to  keep  inspired  language  in  line  with  the 
necessary  beliefs  of  men.  Isolated  as  texts  are  from 
their  inspired  connections,  they  often  seem  to  contra- 
dict our  intuitions,  when,  if  located  in  their  places, 
they  do  not  so  contradict  them.  No  wise  preacher  will 
drag  a  text  through  a  sermon  with  the  semblance  or 
the   suspicion   of  contradiction  to  intuitions.     On  the 


<t 


> 


142  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACH  [NG.  [leot.  x 

other  hand,  it  is  often  a  grand  support  to  a  text  to 
shape  its  explanation  so  as  to  suggest  its  clear  coinci- 
dence with  an  intuition. 

3d,  A  third  object  of  an  explanation  may  be  rhe^ 
torlcal  amplification.  Oftener  than  otherwise,  this  is 
the 'chief  object.'^A  text  which  needs  no  verbal 'criti- 
ism  and  no  logical  adjustment  may  need  to  be  ampli- 
fied. The  Bible  is  a  book  of  suggestions  mainly. 
Texts,  especially,  are  but  hints.  An  explanation  should 
often  expand  them ;  sometimes  it  should  magnify  them. 
It  should  do  the  work  of  the  telescope,  in  bringing  a 
distant  truth  near,  and  of  the  microscope,  in  disclosing 
the  beauty  of  a  minute  truth.  Rhetorical  amplification 
.  may  assume  either  or  both  of  two  forms.  It  may  be 
}  j  Jlhistratiye,4iaiaphfa&e.  This  differs  from  verbal  para- 
^  phrase  only  in  being  constructed  for  illustration  instead 
of  interpretation  of  a  text.  The  aim  is  to  give  not 
merely  a  new  version,  but  an  illumination  of  the  text. 
The  other  form  of  rhetorical  amplification  is  that  of 
descriptive  incident.  This  adds  to  paraphrase  of  a  text 
its  surroundings  in  the  inspired  narrative.  The  object 
is  the  same  as  before,  —  to  educe  the  full  force  of  the 
text. 

A  careful  study  of  the  demands  of  a  text  in  respect 
to  these  several  objects  of  explanations  will  save  a 
preacher  from  needless  and  aimless  expositions.  The 
inquiry  should  be.  Does  the  text,  for  the  use  to  which 
I  am  to  put  it  in  this  sermon,  demand  either  of  these 
objects  ?  Does,  or  does  not,  the  full  force  of  the  text, 
for  my  use  of  it,  lie  on  the  face  of  it?  If  it  does,  then 
no  explanation  is  required.  If  given,  it  will  be  only  an 
encumbrance,  as  many  long-winded,  expository  intro- 
ductions are. 

III.     From  these  objects  of  the  explanation,  we  pro- 


^) 


^o^  ;^^  i^r^'^  ^"^  . 


LECT.  X.J  THE  EXPLANATION  :    MATERIALS.  143 

ceed,  in  the  third  place,  to  consider  the  materials  of 
explanations.  Bearing  in  mind  the  relation  of  the  sub- 
ject to  expository  preaching,  this  inquiry  assumes  more 
importance  than  if  it  were  limited  to  a  fragment  ol 
discourse.  The  chief  design  in  discussing  it  is  to  an- 
swer it  homiletically,  by  showing  how  this  part  of  a 
discourse,  and  how  expository  sermons  in  full,  may  be 
adjusted  to  popular  presentation.  The  laws  of  exege- 
sis, of  course,  underlie  the  whole  question.  Homiletics 
has  somewhat  to  say,  however,  of  a  preacher's  use  of 
those  laws  in  the  pulpit. 

1st,   Of  the   sources   of  expository   materials,   then,        / 
should  be  named  first,  and,  of  course,  primarily  in  point 
of  importance,  the  words  of  the  text.     This  is  obvious. 

2d,  Equally  obvious  is  a  second  source ;  namely,  the  -^ 
immediate  context.  Popular  interest  in  a  text  will  ^' 
oft^n  depend  on  a  skillful  use  of  the  context.  Some- 
times an  elaborate  'ise  of  the  context  is  necessary  to 
disclose  any  homiletic  force  in  the  text  itself.  The  text 
of  a  certain  discourse  is  found  in  Judges  xvii.  13: 
"  Now  know  I  that  the  Lord  will  do  me  good,  seeing  T 
have  a  Levite  to  my  priest."  What  homiletic  use  does 
such  a  text  suggest  ?  What  hearer,  in  listening  to  it, 
sees  in  it  any  thing  to  quicken  interest  beyond  the  mo- 
mentary wonder  that  a  preacher  should  found  a  sermon 
upon  it  ?  But  Rev.  Dr.  Bushnell,  by  an  ingenious  yet 
not  forced  manipulation  of  the  context,  shows  that  the 
text  is  a  unique  example  —  perhaps  the  most  pithy  one 
in  the  Scriptures — of  the  natural  fraternity  between 
wickedness  and  superstition.  Half  the  vivacity  of  ex- 
pository preaching  depends  on  a  skillful  evolution  of 
texts  from  their  biblical  surroundings. 

3d,  This  suggests  a  third  source  of  the  materials  of      Q 
explanations ;  namelv,  the  scope  of  the  whole  argument 


i 


J^ 


'.cH/!A' 


144  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING  [leoi    x. 

from  which  a  text  is  taken.  Not  merely  the  text,  not 
merely  the  immediate  context,  but  the  drift  of  an 
epistle  is  often  essential  to  a  truthful  interpretation  of 
a  word.  A  precept,  a  doctrine,  an  ordinance  depends, 
it  may  be,  not  on  a  text,  nor  on  its  proximate  para- 
graphs, but  on  the  aim  of  a  volume.  The  root  shows 
what  the  branch  must  be.  The  interpretation  of  the 
entire  Book  of  Revelation  hinges  on  the  assumed  aim  of 
the  book  at  the  outset.  This  principle  is  as  valuable 
to  a  preacher  as  to  an  exegete.  <  The  great  theme  of 
anathema  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  is  not  moralism, 
but  ritualism.  The  scope  of  the  epistle  discloses  this, 
and  it  sharpens  the  point  of  a  hundred  texts  against  a 
totally  different  sin  from  that  which  many  sermons  on 
those  texts  assail.  Luther  and  his  associates  were  more 
biblical  in  their  use  of  this  epistle  than  many  modem 
divines.  They  made  it  teach  not  only  the  doctrine  of 
justification  by  faith,  but  this  doctrine  as  opposed,  not 
to  moralism  chiefly,  but  to  reliance  for  salvation  on 
religious  ceremonies.     Their  sermons  on  the  epistle  are 

1^        just  in  the  line  of  the  Apostle's  aim. 

f_^  ^  4th,  A  fourth  source  of  the  materials  of  explanations 
is  found  in  the  historical  and  biographical  literature  of 
texts.  Facts  respecting  the  character  of  the  writer 
of  a  text,  events  in  his  history,  the  place  from  which 
he  wrote,  the  time  at  which  he  wrote,  the  immediate 
occasion  of  his  writing,  the  place  held  by  him  in  tho 
biblical  canon,  the  literary  qualities  of  his  produc- 
tions, the  character  of  the  persons  he  addressed,  events 
in  their  history,  the  effect  of  his  message  upon  them, 
the  peculiarities  of  the  age,  nation,  sect,  family,  to 
which  they  belonged,  the  eminent  contemporaries  of 
both  writer  and  readers,  —  these  and  similar  materials 
you  recognize  as  being  often  the  expository  setting  in 


^/    tt        ,  -  ,       -X 


Ix    h-^^^-^ 


LKCT.  X.]  THE  EXPLANATION  :    MATERIALS.  145 

which  texts  are  presented  by  the  pulpit.  Every  thing 
vitalizes  a  text,  which,  in  a  natural  way,  introduces 
persons  into  and  around  it.  A  group  of  characters  will 
impress  a  text  on  the  popular  mind,  as  an  illustrated 
newspaper  teaches  the  people  a  campaign  or  a  pageant 
when  no  grammatical  explanation  could  get  a  hearing 
The  biblical  writers  and  characters  may  sometimes  be 
delivered  from  the  mist  in  which  the  fact  of  their  in- 
spiration envelops  them  in  many  minds  by  mentioning 
some  of  their  secular  contemporaries.  Can  you  not 
imagine  some  of  your  more  intelligent  hearers  deriving 
a  gleam  of  fresh  interest  in  an  explanation  of  a  text 
from  the  life  of  Elijah  from  a  notice  of  the  fact  that 
he  was  contemporaneous  with  Homer?  Or  of  a  text 
from  the  writings  of  St.  Paul,  from  the  fact  that  he 
was  contemporaneous  with  Seneca  ? 

In  the  eighth  chapter  of  the  First  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians  St.  Paul  discusses  the  point  of  casuistry 
respecting  the  eating  of  meats  offered  to  idols.  What 
is  a  merely  verbal  exegesis  of  that  chapter  worth  to  a 
popular  audience?  It  is  extremely  difficult  to  make 
such  an  audience  feel  that  the  question  there  raised  by 
the  Apostle  had  any  religious  significance.  In  the 
handling  of  that  passage  the  people  need  to  know  some 
of  the  historic  facts  of  Pagan  worship.  They  need  to 
get  a  glimpse  of  the  old  Greek  and  Roman  private  life. 
They  should  see  that  the  question  of  which  St.  Paul 
treats  was  a  very  practical  one  to  a  Roman  Christian 
every  time  he  went  into  the  market  to  supply  his  table 
They  should  be  told  that  the  question  concerned  the 
common  social  courtesies  of  Roman  life.  Not  only 
was  it  true  that  meats  from  the  temples  were  sold  in 
the  markets,  but  Roman  banquets  were  often  sacrifices 
to  t\e  gods.     Invitations  to  dine  with  a  friend  were 


\% 


146  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  x. 

often  expressed  in  language  technical  to  religious  wor 
ship.  Hortensius  invites  Cicero  to  a  sacrifice  to  Jupi- 
ter :  he  means  that  Hortensius  desires  the  pleasure  of 
Cicero's  company  at  dinner.  The  ritualistic  character 
of  pri  vate  banquets  remained  in  form  long  after  the  faith 
of  the  cultivated  classes  in  Paganism  had  collapsed. 
That  which  was  true  in  this  respect  at  Rome  was 
equally  true  at  Corinth.  The  Apostle's  casuistry,  there- 
fore, entered  into  the  conventional  courtesies  of  life  in 
Corinth  and  throughout  the  then  civilized  world.  The 
question  in  its  principle  was  world-wide,  and  perpet- 
ual in  its  bearings.  Christian  life  to-day  in  Paris  and 
New  York  needs  the  discussion  of  it  as  much  as  in 
Rome  and  Corinth  in  St.  Paul's  time.  It  is  a  great 
thing  to  establish  in  the  popular  convictions  this  pert^ 
nence  of  the  Scriptures  to  modern  wants;  and  very 
largely  this  must  be  done  by  the  apt  use  of  the  historic 
cal  and  biographical  literature  of  texts. 

5th,  A  fifth  source  of  the  materials  of  exposition  is 
und  in  the  comparison  of  texts  with  parallel  passages 

of  the  Scriptures.  "  ' > 

(1)  One  obvious  use  of  this  expedient  is  to  define 
the  limits  of^an  interpretation.  Many  texts  are  truths 
in  their  extremes.  Some  are  metaphors.  Some  are 
the  boldest  of  hyperboles.  Some,  on  the  face  of  them, 
are  paradoxes;  literally  interpreted,  they  are  absurd. 
Some,  in  the  history  of  Christian  doctrine,  have  become 
enslaved  to  philosophy.  Some  are  loaded  with  inherit- 
ed misrepresentations.  Some  are  disputed  by  balanced 
authorities.  It  is  a  great  art  to  handle  these  texts 
wisely  before  an  unlettered  audience.  The  common 
mind  is  childlike  in  its  tendency  to  literalism  and  its 
attachment  to  inherited  beliefs.  That  is  a  masterly  aim 
from  the  pulpit  which  can  always  evolve  the  truth  to 


^        .   ..  ■•  •■ 

(JSOT.  r.]  THE  EXPLANATION:    MATERIALS.  147 

popular  satisfaction  without  awakening  the  Buspicion 
that  the  Pible  is  explained  away. 

One  of  the  most  effective  methods  of  doing  this  is  to 
make  Scripture  interpret  Scripture.  Explain  a  meta* 
phor  by  a  literal  passage.  Offset  one  extreme  by  it3 
opposite  in  biblical  speech.  Interpret  an  hyperbole  hf 
yoking  it  with  a  biblical  definition.  Read  the  poetry 
of  the  Scriptures  by  the  help  of  its  prose.  An  abused 
text  disabuse  by  association  with  one  which  speaks  for 
both.  A  disputed  text  expound  by  parallels  which  are 
not  disputed.  The  proper  limits  of  interpretation  are 
thus  often  defined  most  quickly,  and,  for  the  popular 
satisfaction,  most  conclusively.  It  assists  the  common 
mind  to  understand  the  Third  Commandment,  —  "I  the 
Lord  thy  God  am  a  jealous  God,  visiting  the  iniquity  of 
the  fathers  upon  the  children,"  —  if  we  set  over  against 
it  the  declaration  in  Ezekiel,  "  The  son  shall  not  bear 
the  iniquity  of  the  father."  If  the  text,  "God  is 
love,"  is  abused  by  a  humanitarian  laxity,  we  tone  up 
the  truth  most  readily  by  the  contrasted  text,  "  God  is 
a  consuming  fire."  Many  texts  which  are  abused  by 
fatalistic  interpretations  we  redeem  most  securely  by 
alliance  of  them  with  such  passages  as,  "  Whosoever 
will,  let  him  take  the  water  of  life  freely."  The  gen- 
eral drift  of  parallel  passages  is  the  best  defense  we 
have  against  a  false  interpretation  of  one  or  two  iso- 
lated texts  which  merely  grammatical  exegesis  can  not 
save  from  fatalistic  teachings,  because,  grammatically 
expounded,  they  do  teach  fatalism  more  naturally  than 
any  thing  else.  "  No  man  can  come  to  me  except  the 
Father,  which  hath  sent  me,  draw  him/'  is  a  text  of 
this  kind.  If  any  language  interpreted  by  grammatical 
exegesis  alone  can  teach  fatalism  in  the  matter  of  salva- 
tion, that  text  teaches  it.     We  save  it  only  by  limiting 


it 


'V I . 


148  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lbct.  x 

it  by  the  general  drift  of  the  Scriptures  as  indicated  bj 
parallel  passages. 

(2)  Another  use  of  this  expedient  in  expositions  is 
to  explain  peculiarities  of  idiom.  The  New  Testament 
contains  Hebraisms.  These  are  often  best  explained 
b}^  parallels  from  the  Old  Testament.  The  dialect  of 
prophecy  has  idioms  peculiar  to  no  other  type  of  revela- 
tion. The  so-called  double  sense  of  prophecy  is  of  this 
character.  The  use  of  the  word  "day"  in  prophetic 
idiom  is  a  peculiarity.  We  gain  much,  if,  by  parallel 
citations,  we  make  it  clear  that  such  idioms  exist.  The 
interpretation  of  an  idiom  comes  to  light  of  itself,  if 
we  can  collect  examples  of  it  in  groups. 
.;  (3)  Again :  parallels  are  valuable  in  explanations, 
for  purposes  of  illustration.  An  obscure  text  may 
often  be  best  explained  by  comparison  with  a  plain  one 
teaching:  the  same  sentiment.  A  text  declarative  of  a 
principle  may  be  explained  by  a  biblical  narrative  illus- 
trating the  principle.  Our  whole  sacrificial  theory  of 
the  Atonement,  so  far  as  it  depends  on  biblical  proof, 
hinges  finally  on  parallels  between  the  apostolic  decla- 
rations of  it  and  the  Mosaic  illustrations  of  it.  What 
those  declarations  mean  depends  on  what  the  Mosaic 
ritual  was. 

(4)  Further:  parallels  are  valuable  in  ^planations 
us  confirmatory  arguments.  The  exposition  is  precisely 
the  place  in  which  to  strengthen  an  interpretation  by 
reduplication  of  it  from  other  texts.  It  was  a  favorite 
method  with  Rev.  Albert  Barnes  to  buttress  his  texts 
by  citations  of  similar  Scriptures.  I  once  heard  him 
preach  a  sermon  of  which  seven-eighths  consisted  of 
biblical  passages  illustrating  and  confirming  different 
phases  of  his  text.  This  expedient  is  liable  to  great 
abuse ;  but,  skillfully  employed,  it  is  sometimes  all  the 
explanation  that  a  text  requires. 


I*, 


7 


l/l^w^4^  *  %*.   f 


LBCT.  X.]  THE  EXPLANATION  :    MATERIALS.  141) 

6th,  A  sixth  source  of  the  materials  of  exposition  is 
the  application  of  the  philosophy  of  common  sense  to 
exegesis.  The  intelligibility  of  language  grows  out  of 
the  roots  of  philosophy  which  are  in  every  mind.  We 
bring  to  the  Bible,  antecedently  to  our  interpretation 
of  it,  the  germs  of  philosophy  by  which  we  understand 
it,  if  at  all.  We  can  not  help  this.  A  preacher  should 
understand  and  appreciate  it,  if  he  would  commend  the 
Bible  to  the  common  mind.  The  Bible,  rightly  inter- 
preted, has  an  almost  omnipotent  ally  in  the  common 
sense  of  common  people :  falsely  interpreted,  it  has  as 
potent  a  foe  there.  This  principle  is  liable  to  abuse ; 
but,  like  other  abused  truths,  it  must  be  used  to  save  it 
from  abuse. 

(1)  In  application,  and  in  illustration  of  the  princi- 
ple, the  fact  deserves  notice  that  progress  in  menta] 
science  reacts  upon  the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures 
The  effect  of  improvements  in  mental  science  upon  dog- 
matic theology  is  well  understood.  The  creeds  of  the 
Church  establish  it  beyond  question.  The  same  princi- 
ple is  not  always  so  fully  recognized  in  the  relation  of 
mental  science  to  the  history  of  exegesis.  It  is  a  truth 
of  great  moment  to  the  pulpit,  that  exegesis  has  a  his- 
tory which  has  been  open  all  along  the  line  to  the  in- 
fluences of  philosophy.  Those  influences  have  been  less 
direct  upon  the  history  of  exegesis  than  upon  the  hJs' 
tory  of  :?reeds,  but  not  a  whit  less  powerful. 

For  instance,  we  do  not  interpret  the  Scriptures  pre- 
cisely as  men  did  when  the  dominant  schools  of  philoso- 
phy were  all  tinged  with  fatalism.  We  can  not,  if  we 
would,  interpret  certain  texts  as  Augustine,  or  even  as 
Calvin  did,  without  sacrificing  much  which  mental  sci- 
ence has  established  since  their  day  respecting  the  free- 
dom of  the  will.     The  common  mind,  as  well  as  the 


n  L  L-r-^(-<^h 


150  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lkct.  x. 

more  highly  cultivated,  will  not,  if  left  to  itself,  inter- 
pret the  Scriptures  now  precisely  as  it  did  when  its 
own  consciousness  was  overshadowed  and  repressed  by 
a  fatalistic  philosophy  on  the  part  of  its  religious  teach- 
ers. Mind  is  so  related  to  language,  that  philology  in- 
evitably responds  to  philosophy.  The  two  periodically 
salute  each  other  on  the  march  of  the  ages.  We  can 
not  interpret  certain  Scriptures  as  Turretin  did,  any 
more  than  we  can  interpret  certain  other  Scriptures  as 
the  popes  did,  who  made  them  teach  the  Ptolemaic 
system  of  astronomy.  The  freedom  of  the  will  has 
conquered  a  place  in  all  civilized  philosophy;  certain 
doctrines  of  theology  have  shaped  themselves  by  the 
side  of  it ;  and  these  have  been  stereotyped  by  certain 
improved  exegeses.  This  inter-relationship  has  been 
entirely  legitimate.  Truth  has  responded  to  truth.  Dis 
covery  in  the  one  direction  has  necessitated  discovery 
in  the  other.  True,  the  principle  here  involved  has 
been  abused.  It  is  a  perilous  principle  because  it  is  so 
eflfective.(  The  blade  is  dangerous  because  it  has  so 
keen  an  edge.  }  But,  with  the  guards  which  every  ^ital 
piinciple  needs  when  in  the  possession  of  a  finite  and  a 
depraved  mind,  it  is  a  necessary  principle  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  a  book  which  counts  its  age  by  thousands 
of  years,  and  yet  claims  to  be  a  revelation  of  the  mind 
of  God. 

(2)  Further :  progress  in  political  science  afPects  oai 
use  of  the  philosophy  of  common  sense  in  the  interpre- 
tation of  the  Scriptures.  Our  whole  modern  theory 
respecting  responsibility  to  the  State  for  religious  belief 
depends  on  an  abandonment  of  n^any  venerated  inter- 
pretations of  texts.  Those  interpretations  have  yielded 
to  common  sense.  They  have  not  surrendered  to  gram- 
mar and  lexicon  •  for,  under  grammar  and  lexicon  alone, 


LEOT.  X.]  THE  EXPLANATION  :    MATERIALS.  151 

they  are  possible  still.  They  have  yielded  to  pressure 
from  without.  Commou  sense  quickened  by  political 
progress  has  discovered  that  those  interpretations  were 
false.     The  Bible  does  not  teach  them,  and  never  did. 

Do  we  not,  for  example,  necessarily  interpret  to-day 
t  he  language  of  our  Lord,  "  Go  out  into  the  highways 
and  hedges,  and  compel  them  to  come  in,"  differently 
from  the  mann^p-irTwEich  those  Fathers  interpreted^  it 
who  drew  from  it  most  prayerfully,  not  only  theii 
authority,  but  their  duty,  to  establish  the  Inquisition? 
Yet  we  owe  our  deliverance  from  thraldom  under  that 
text  largely  to  the  Prince  of  Orange.  Do  we  not  in- 
evitably interpret  the  text,  "Rebellion  is  as  the  sin 
of  witchcraft,"  differently  from  the  manner  in  which 
the  churchmen  of  Milton's  time  interpreted  it,  when 
they  understood  from  it  that  republicanism  was  blas- 
phemy ?  De  Quincey  says  that  this  was  once  "  a  jewel 
of  a  text ;  for  broomsticks  were  proved  out  of  it  most 
clearly,  and  also  the  atrocity  of  republican  govern- 
ment." Look  into  Algernon  Sidney,  or  into  Locke's 
controversy  with  Sir  Robert  Filmer,  or  into  any  books 
of  those  days  on  political  principles,  and  you  will  find 
that  the  Scriptures  were  so  used  as  to  form  an  absolute 
bar  against  human  progress.  What  has  wrought  the 
change  to  modern  methods  of  interpretation  ?  In  part, 
it  is  the  two  centuries  of  progress  in  the  philosophy 
of  civil  government,  which  has  reacted  upon  the  Scrip- 
tures through  the  state  of  mind  which  men  bring  with 
them  to  the  work  of  interpretation. 

The  same  phenomenon  is  seen  in  the  history  of  the 
biblical  argument  on  slavery.  Slavery  was  unanswera- 
bly vindicated  from  the  Bible,  so  long  as  we  allowed 
its  advocates  to  bring  to  the  exegesis  of  the  book  that 
philosophy  of  civil  government  which  'lad  been  domi* 


152  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  x. 

nant  lor  a  thousand  years.  It  is  not  yet  a  liundred  and 
forty  years  since  John  Newton,  after  his  conversion, 
took  command  of  a  slave-ship,  and  held  it  for  four  years, 
praying  over  his  Bible  all  the  while,  and  verily  believ- 
ing that  he  had  tender  communion  with  God,  "espe- 
cially," as  he  says  with  charming  stupidity,  "on  my 
African  voyages."  What  is  it  that  renders  such  an 
anomaly  impossible  now?  It  is  mainly  an  intuition 
brought  by  the  popular  mind  to  the  interpretation  of 
the  Scriptures.  "  If  slavery  is  not  wrong,  nothing  is 
wrong."  Men  have  discovered  the  true  interpretation 
of  the  Bible  by  the  lightning  of  that  intuition  to  which 
President  Lincoln  gave  utterance.  Yet  the  power  to 
feel  it,  and  the  courage  to  trust  it  in  its  fullness,  have 
been  the  product,  mainly,  of  the  last  two  hundred 
years. 

These  illustrations  indicate  the  broad  and  varied 
reach  of  the  principle  before  us,  —  that  the  philosophy 
of  common  sense  is  progressive,  and  that  its  progress 
reacts  legitimately  upon  the  discovery  of  the  meaning 
of  the  Scriptures.  The  principle,  be  it  repeated,  is  a 
perilous  one ;  but,  because  it  is  so,  we  should  recognize 
it  in  its  uses,  to  save  it  from  its  abuses.  We  can  not 
bury  it  by  disuse.  It  is  no  scholastic  monopoly.  The 
popular  mind  will  use  it  lawlessly,  if  the  pulpit  does  not 
teach  the  people  its  legitimate  use.  It  is  one  of  those 
forms  of  popular  conviction  which  we  can  not  control, 
unless  we  accept  it  cordially.  If  we  force  upon  tlie 
Scriptures  interpretations  which  ignore  common  sense 
the  popular  mind  will  either  create  for  itself  wiser  bib- 
lical teachers,  or  will  reject  the  Bible  as  an  authoritative 
revelation. 


'K-^^n..  -- 


LECTURE  XI. 

THE    EXPLANATION;   MATERIALS,   QUALITIES. 

7th,  Proceeding  with  the  discussion  of  the  materials        /» 
of  exposition,  we  find  a  seventh  source  of  them  in  the   Ja   ^y 
facts  of  natural  science.  ^fM.  y 

(1)  Sometimes  natural  science  illuminates  the  com-  '\^iC(j 
monly  received  interpretation  of  texts.     Dr.  Chalmers  ^ 

brought  the  whole  system  of  modern  astronomy  under 
tribute  to  the  text,  "  Joy  shall  be  in  heaven  over  one 
sinner  that  repenteth."  William  Jay  added  to  the 
clerical  stock  of  thought  by  his  use  of  the  science  of 
metallurgy  to  illustrate  the  text,  "He  shall  sit  as  a 
refiner  and  purifier  of  silver."  John  Pye  Smith  and 
others  have  brought  the  science  of  physiology  to  enforce 
the  text,  "  I  am  fearfully  and  wonderfully  made."  A 
volume  has  been  written  on  the  religion  of  chemistry, 
which  can  not  but  be  auxiliary  to  the  exposition  of 
many  biblical  texts.  The  science  of  anatomy  has  often 
been  made  to  assist  interpretations  of  the  narratives 
of  our  Lord's  crucifixion.  A  certain  physician  now 
li\ing  has  probably  been  saved  from  infidelity  by  observ- 
ing the  unconscious  truthfulness  of  the  evangelists,  in 
their  account  of  the  crucifixion,  to  anatomical  facts 
which  then  were  entirely  unknown  to  science.  No 
doubt  can  exist  of  the  propriety  of  employing  the 
fruits  of  natural  science  in  homiletic  service,  in  cases 

153 


?/ 


154  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING  [lfct.  xi. 

like  these,  in  which  science  directly  illustrates  and  in- 
tensifies the  commonly  received  interpretations  of  the 
Scriptures. 

(2)  Occasion  for  solicitude  arises,  however,  in  the 
minds  of  many,  lest  natural  science,  in  other  cases, 
should  make  havoc  with  exegesis.  A  homiletic  ques- 
tion arises,  therefore,  to  this  effect ,  "  Ought  a  preacher 
to  disturb  the  popular  mind  by  the  homiletic  use  of 
scientific  discoveries  which  seem  to  conflict  with  bibli- 
cal exegesis  ?  "  The  following  well-known  facts  appear 
entitled  to  the  weight  of  conclusive  argument  in  the 
affirmative. 

I  The  weight  of  scholarly  authority  among  commenta- 
'  tors  now  admits  the  principle  that  scientific  discovery 
may  modify  within  certain  limits  our  interpretation  of 
the  Scriptures.  It  can  not  be  questioned  that  modern 
philology  has  yielded  somewhat  to  natural  science. 
Commentators  may  differ  in  detail  as  to  what  and  how 
much  should  be  yielded ;  but  the  weight  of  authority, 
by  a  vast  preponderance,  agrees  in  yielding  something. 
The  principle  is  admitted,  that  philology  is  not  above 
admonition  and  instruction  from  other  sciences.  This 
fact  should  have  great  weight  in  guiding  the  ministra- 
tions of  the  pulpit.  On  questions  of  this  nature  the 
popular  mind  should  be  taught  to  follow  the  authority 
of  Christian  scholarship.  We  do  incalculable  injury 
if  we  encourage  the  people  in  a  pious  independence 
of  learning  in  their  interpretations  of  the  Bible.  It  is 
unsafe  for  a  preacher,  even  by  silence,  to  allow  a  hiatiia 
to  grow  between  the  popular  faith  and  the  results  of 
learned  investigation. 

A  second  fact  to  be  remembered  is  the  one  so  often 
and  so  justly  claimed  by  biblical  philologians,  —  that 
science  has  never  yet  established  facts  inconsistent  with 


LECT.  XI.]        THE  EXPLANATION :    MATERIALS.  155 

a  natural  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  on  philologi- 
cal principles.  The  truth  of  this  position  need  not  be 
argued  now  :  it  is  too  familiar  to  you.  But  its  bearing 
on  the  policy  of  the  pulpit  for  the  future  needs  to  be 
enforced.  Two  points,  specially,  we  should  claim  as 
settled.  One  is  that  the  controversy  between  science  Jt'^ 
and  exegesis   has  an  accumulated  history.     Apparent  / 

collision  between  the  two  is  no  novelty.  We  should 
never  treat  it  as  a  novelty  in  our  own  minds,  nor  allow 
an  opponent  to  do  so  in  discussing  the  claims  of  the 
Scriptures.  Very  much  is  lost  with  the  people,  if  we 
lose  a  certain  prestige  to  which  the  history  of  this  con- 
troversy entitles  us,  by  seeming  ourselves  to  come  to  it, 
or  permitting  our  opponents  to  do  so,  de  novo^  as  if 
the  conflict  were  one  in  which  nothing  had  as  yet  been 
settled,  and  nothing,  therefore,  could  at  present  be 
assumed.  We  should  always  start  with  the  indispu- 
table claim  that  the  conflict  has  a  history. 

The  other  point  is,  that,  setting  aside  the  quest: 
of  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures,  a  philosophical  ar- 
gument may  be  constructed  in  their  defense,  founded 
upon  the  history  of  this  controversy.  Candid  philology 
has  never*  yet  been  contradicted  by  candid  science, 
and  it  is  a  philosophical  inference  that  it  never 
will  be.  Presumed  contradictions  in  numerous  in- 
stances have  been  disproved  by  the  final  conclusions  of 
authorities  on  both  sides.  Philology  has  modified  its 
interpretations.  True;  but  science  has  modified  ita 
claims ;  some  it  has  abandoned ;  others  it  has  qualified. 
Natural  science  has  shifted  its  ground  more  frequently 
and  more  rapidly  than  biblical  philology  has  done. 
The  result  thus  far  is,  that,  with  no  disparagement  to 
either,  each  has  approached  the  other.  On  several 
great  trpics  once  in  dispute   there   is   no   longer   an^ 


pu- 


156  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  r?. 

respectable  debate  between  them.  They  see  eye  to  eye. 
The  point  of  the  argument  for  exegesis  is  that  sound 
philological  principles  have  not  been  abandoned.  Sci- 
ence has  created  no  necessity  for  the  surrender  of  them. 
They  have  only  been  defined  more  accurately.  Exege- 
sis understands  itself  better  than  ever  before,  and  is  all 
t]ie  stronger  for  its  changes  of  base. 

It  follows  that  the  pulpit  need  not  be  disturbed  by 
the  occurrence  of  new  points  of  contact  between  nat- 
ural science  and  exegesis.  These  will  occur  as  old  ones 
have  occurred.  The  time  may  come  when  the  most 
candid  and  the  most  reverent  attitude  of  mind  respect- 
ing them  will  be  one  of  temporary  suspense.  As  hon- 
est men  we  may  be  obliged  sometimes  to  suggest  prob- 
able interpretations  rather  than  those  of  which  we  feel 
assured.  Even  possible  conceptions  of  the  inspired 
meaning  may  be  temporarily  given  for  the  want  of 
better.  Be  it  so :  temporary  suspense  of  confident  exe- 
gesis is  no  new  thing:  the  Bible  has  survived  many 
such  periods.  We  should  not  be  alarmed.  Nor  should 
we  ever  intimate  to  the  people  a  doubt  from  which  they 
might  reasonably  infer  that  our  faith  is  disturbed.  •'  The 
pulpit  should  never  tremble  at  the  shaking  of  a  spear.  ) 
Faith  ought  not  to  waver  at  a  phenomenon  which  has 
become  almost  periodical  in  the  history  of  opinion. 
Timid  utterances  from  the  pulpit  under  such  suspenses 
of  interpretations  are  like  the  fright  of  savages  at  an 
eclipse.  Wait.  Teach  the  people  to  wait.  Teach  them 
intellectual  patience.  The  history  of  such  phenomena 
m  the  past  is  a  pledge  for  the  future.  What  if  heredi- 
tary theories  of  inspiration  have  to  undergo  revision? 
Thifi  is  no  novelty.  Inherited  faith  can  scarcely  suffer 
a  ruder  shock  than  it  received  and  lived  through  wheo 
the  Copernican  astronomy  first  met  the  word  of  God. 


LBCT.  xi]  THE  EXPLANATION :    MATERIALS.  157 

The  current  theories  of  inspiration  were  revolutionized 
by  that  apparent  collision.  Yet  how  simple  a  thing 
that  revolution  seems  to  us  now!  How  securely  we 
smile  at  the  popes  who  tried  to  throttle  it!  Why, 
then,  should  we  fear  to  encounter  similar  revolutions  in 
the  future?  Why,  for  instance,  should  we  fear  the 
Darwinian  speculations,  be  their  conclusions  what  they 
may  ?  Is  there  not  here  a  philosophical  argument  alto* 
gether  independent  of  the  divine  authority  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  yet  an  argument  so  simple  that  it  can  often 
be  made  available  for  anchoring  the  faith  of  the  people 
in  the  Bible  ?  I  can  not  but  think  that  the  pulpit  itself 
frequently  needs  toning  up  to  a  more  philosophic  confi- 
dence in  the  destiny  of  the  Scriptures. 

(3)  This  leads  me  to  observe  that  an  educated  clergy 
must  bear  some  opprobrium  caused  by  the  reckless 
claims  of  an  uneducated  clergy.  Ignorant  and  partly 
educated  preachers  do  immense  injury  to  the  pulpit 
by  theu'  blind  hostility  to  science.  They  assert  claims 
in  behalf  of  inspiration  which  can  not  possibly  be  sus- 
tained. Christian  scholarship  has  no  desire  to  sustain 
them.  Christian  ignorance  insists  on  interpretations 
at  which  the  intelligence  of  the  world  laughs,  and  over 
which  the  intelligence  of  the  Church  mourns.  When 
zeal  in  opposing  the  science  of  infidels  intemperately 
charges  infidelity  upon  science,  infidelity  gets  the  best 
of  the  argument.  ;  A  reaction  to  the  discredit  of  cleri- 
cal candor  and  clerical  learning  is  inevitable.)  We 
must,  therefore,  take  this  into  account  in  adjusting  the 
policy  of  the  pulpit.  We  should  be  more  cautious  to 
do  justice  to  the  facts  of  science,  because  we  must  bear 
the  brunt  of  the  conflict  at  a  point  where  we  are  weak- 
ened by  our  own  allies.  Our  strategy  should  be  simply 
that  of  candor  and  courage.     Not  only  admit  all  that 


158  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  si 

science  can  fairly  claim,  but  admit  it  with  tlie  coolness 
cf  one  who  can  afford  to  do  it;  admit  it  with  the 
magnanimity  of  one  who  claims  his  enemy  for  a  friend. 
As  interpreters,  we  claim  science  as  the  tributary  of 
th3  Bible.  The  hostility  is  only  apparent,  and  that 
appearance  is  but  temporary.  We  should  act  upon  this 
conviction.  We  can  afford  to  be  generous ;  for  all  that 
we  give  will  return  to  us  again. 

r4^  A^  final  fact,  which  you  have  doubtless  antici- 
pated me  in  uttering,  is  that  the  policy  here  recom- 
mended is  the  only  one  which  can  be  permanently 
successful.  The  popular  mind  has  a  very  brief  and 
blunt  logic,  which  it  will  inevitably  oppose  to  a  written 
revelation  if  it  is  once  permitted  to  believe  that  the 
revelation  can  not  bear  the  facts  of  the  material  world. 
In  the  long  run,  men  will  believe  that  they  see  what 
they  see,  and  hear  what  they  hear,  let  the  book  say 
what  it  may.  Fire  is  fire :  there  are  no  two  opinions 
about  that.  That  is  not  a  divine  revelation  which 
disputes  the  fact.  The  popular  mind  will  feel  not  a 
moment's  hesitation,  if,  by  any  blindness  of  the  pulpit, 
infidelity  can  succeed  in  narrowing  the  conflict  down 
to  any  such  controversy  as  that.  It  is  then  no  longer 
a  conflict  between  faith  and  reason:  it  is  a  conflict 
between  faith  and  the  human  senses:  it  is  between 
faith  in  dead  ages  and  the  testimony  of  a  man's  own 
eyes.  For  permanent  service,  therefore,  the  only  policy 
which  is  practicable  to  the  pulpit  is  to  hold  science 
in  its  normal  relations  as  the  friend  and  ally  of  the 
Scriptures.  Use  it  as  a  tributary;  use  it  freely;  use 
it  trustfully ;  use  it  courageously. 

IV.  We  pass  now  to  the  fourth  topic  in  the  discus^ 
Bion  of  the  explanation ;  namely,  its  qualities. 

1st,  In  the  first  place,  an  explanation  should  be  such 


LiiOT.  XI.]         THE  EXPLANATION:    QUALITIES.  159 

as  to  give  the  true  meaning  of  a  text.  Bearing  in  mind 
the  preliminary  remark  already  made,  that  we  are 
considering  the  theory  of  explanations  with  reference, 
not  to  the  explanatory  fragment  of  a  topical  sermon 
alone,  but  to  the  whole  subject  of  expository  preaching 
as  well,  the  rule  now  before  us  is  evidently  fundamen- 
tal to  a  large  proportion  of  evangelical  preaching.  We 
have,  on  a  former  occasion,  considered  the  question  of 
the  use  of  interpolated  texts  and  of  mistranslated  texts. 
A  practical  question  distinct  from  that  occurs  in  every 
preacher's  experience.  It  is,  "  May  we  employ  a  popu- 
lar or  an  inherited  misinterpretation  of  a  ^text  for  the 
sake  of  homiletic  advantages  attending  such  a  ::se  of 
it?"  Such  advantages  doubtless  exist.  Effective  ser- 
mons are  preached  on  such  misinterpretations.  Souls 
have  been  saved  by  such  sermons.  Still  the  obvious 
reply  to  the  inquiry  must  be  in  the  negative  ;  and  this, 
on  substantially  the  same  principles  as  those  applied  to 
the  use  of  interpolations  and  mistranslations. 

(1)  The  meaning  of  the  text  is  the  text.  The  in- 
spired thought  constitutes  the  text.  A  misinterpreted 
text  is  no  part  of  the  Bible. 

(2)  Moreover,  many  popular  misinterpretations  are 
inferior  m  homiletic  value  to  the  true  interpretations. 
Many  texts  are  more  pertinent  and  beautiful  and  sug- 
gestive for  the  direct  uses  of  the  pulpit  in  their  true 
version  than  in  their  commonly  received  perversion. 
An  example  of  this  occurs  in  the  popular  interpretation 
of  Col.  ii.  8:  "  Beware  lest  any  man  spoil  you  through 
philosophy  and  vain  deceit."  This  is  misinterpieted 
commonly,  as  teaching  the  danger  of  the  corrupting 
influence  of  philosophy  upon  religious  doctrine.  Both 
the  pulpit  and  theological  schools  are  responsible  for 
encouragiug   this   erroneous   interpretaticu.     The   pas- 


,u^-^^  -^  ^.'  '''•  r^t*, 


vU    0^  ,^  /^-t    — '^'^  ^^ 


>\ 


THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [leci.  xi.  / 

^  /  sage  com  ains  no  such  warning.  It  teaches  a  far  more 
^Hj^^  necessary  and  impressive  lesson.  Strictly  interpreted, 
Yt^      and  translated  into  modern  speech,  this  text  means  no^^J^^ 

''      more  nor  less  than  this:  "Be  on  your  guard,  that  naf^ 
y^'*'       man  may  captivate  you  by  religious  sophistry."     This 
i^ci>f^  idea,  for  the  purposes  of  the  pulpit  to  say  the  least,  is 
f  vastly  superior  to  that  which  has  been  so  often  foisted 

into  the  passage,  of  the  danger  of  philosophy  in  cor 
rupting  systems  of  theology.  So  it  will  be  found  to  be 
in  the  large  majority  of  instances.  The  true  sense  of  a 
text  exegetically  expounded  is  its  best  sense  for  homi- 

letic  use.  •  «t:3  *^c^r. iTtu:.^  '^^^k 

(3)  It  snbuld  be  further  observed,  that  the  past  and 
present  usage  of  the  pulpit  respecting  truthfulness  of 
interpretation  is  not  entirely  trustworthy.  Explana- 
tions which  exegesis  has  exploded  are  sometimes  re- 
tained by  the  pulpit  for  their  homiletic  usefulness. 
Preachers  often  employ  in  the  pulpit  explanations  of 
texts  which  they  would  not  defend  in  an  association 
of  scholars.  The  pulpit  suffers  in  its  exegetical  practice 
by  retaining  for  polemic  uses  explanations  which  ori- 
ginated in  an  abuse  of  philosophy.  I  do  not  say  in  the 
use  of  philosophy.  We  have  seen  that  there  is  a  legiti- 
mate use  of  philosophy,  within  certain  limits,  in  aiding 
the  discoveries  and  application  of  sound  philology. 
But  philosophy  has  often  tyrannized  over  philology. 
/  In  the  defense  of  the  creeds  of  the  Church,  the  exigen- 
I  cies  of  philosophy  have  overborne  the  philological  in- 
I  Btinct  of  the  popular  mind,  as  well  as  the  philological 
y  learning  of  the  schools.  A  modern  exegete  affirms 
that  the  interpretation  of  the  seventh  chapter  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans  which  makes  i  fc  a  description  of 
Christian  experience  was  n  ever  heard  of  in  the  Church 
till  the  time  of  Augustine.     He  originated  it  to  support 

.    43'-^  i/^  ;,  a-  '^^  ^-^  ''^  -M 


LBcr.  XI.]  THE  EXPT  Al^ATION :    QUALITIES.  161  4^ 

his  theory  of  original  sin.  He  held  the  opposite  inter- 
pretation, as  now  held  by  many  German  exegetes,  till  ' 
he  was  pressed  in  the  argument  with  Pelagius.  The 
authority  of  Augustine,  and  the  force  of  his  theology, 
have  sent  down  to  our  own  day  the  interpretation  he 
then  adopted. 

Again :  the  pulpit  often  suffers,  in  its  exegetical  prac- 
tice, from  an  unthinking  acceptance  of  certain  populai 
traditions.  Where  no  homiletic  nor  polemic  uses  of 
texts  are  in  question,  certain  traditional  ideas  are 
blended  with  the  popular  reading  of  the  Scriptures, 
which  the  pulpit  often  adopts  without  inquiry  into 
their  biblical  authority.  For  example :  the  idea  that 
Marx  Magdalene  was  a  harlot  is  generally  assumed  in 
homiletic  explanations  of  her  history.  This  is  the  popu- 
lar idea.  From  this  is  derived  a  popular  title  for  asy- 
lums for  fallen  women.  But  there  is  no  evidence  in  the 
Scriptures  that  she  was  any  thing  worse  than  the  victim 
of  demoniacal  possession.  Yet  the  popular  mind  has 
assumed  that  the  phrase  "seven  devils"  (so  often  called 
"  unclean  spirits "  in  the  Scriptures)  means  profligacy. 
Painters  have  seconded  the  assumption,  and  art  has 
made  it  immortal.  The  pulpit  has  fallen  in  with  it 
without  much  inquiry  into  the  precise  significance  of 
the  inspired  narrative.  Archbishop  Whately  says,  that, 
when  he  once  ventured  to  question  the  popular  theory, 
the  Scriptures  were  confidently  referred  to  by  his  oppo- 
nent as  proof  conclusive  against  him.  But  the  only 
evidence  was  found  to  be  the  table  of  contents  which 
formed  the  heading  of  the  chapter  in  our  English  ver- 
sion. 

Still  further:  the  pulpit  suffers,  in  its  exegetical 
authority,  from  the  habit  of  spiritualizing  all  parts  of 
the   Scriptures  indiscriminately.     Ancient  usage  justv 


.>•. 

^ 


162  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  x\ 

fied  any  use  of  a  text,  which,  by  any  eccentric  laws 
of  association,  could  be  made  serviceable  to  any  practi- 
cal religious  impression.  Popular  commentaries  have 
largely  contributed  to  this  abuse.  Some  of  them  no 
preacher  can  read  respectfully  without  insensibly  sur- 
rendering somewhat  of  his  integrity  of  exegetical  taste. 

Such  are  the  more  important  of  the  reasons  for  the 
caution  which  I  have  advanced,  that  the  past  and  pres- 
ent usage  of  the  pulpit  respecting  truthfulness  of  in- 
terpretation is  not  entirely  trustworthy.  You  can  not 
safely  accept  that  usage  as  authority.  It  is  improving, 
but  it  is  no  model  for  a  youthful  ministry.  Do  not  be 
misled  by  it.  Form  your  own  model,  and  let  it  be  one 
which  scholarship,  and  good  taste,  and  good  sense  can 
approve. 

(4)  In  further  consideration  oi  the  question  before 
us,  let  it  be  observed  that  a  want  of  hermeneutic  accu- 
racy in  the  explanation  of  the  Scriptures  is  hazardous 
to  the  authority  of  the  pulpit.  A  preacher  is  in  danger 
of  great  inconsistencies  of  interpretation  who  accepts 
any  other  ultimate  guide  in  his  expositions  than  that  of 
hermeneutic  science.  "Ultimate  guide,"  I  say;  for 
the  legitimacy  of  the  influence  of  philosophy  and  of 
natural  science,  as  proximate  guides,  has  been  admit- 
ted. That  is,  they  legitimately  help  to  define  and  dis- 
cover principles  of  biblical  hermeneutics.  But,  when 
those  principles  are  settled,  their  authority  is  final.  A 
preacher  puts  in  peril  the  power  of  his  pulpit,  if  he 
fails  to  recognize  this,  and  to  act  upon  it.  He  will 
often  make  the  Scriptures  self-contradictory. 

A  more  subtle  danger  is  that  of  awakening  the  silent 
conviction  in  the  minds  of  hearers  that  a  preacher's 
interpretations  are  not  trustworthy.  Hearers  are  more 
shrewd  than  is  often  supposed  in  detecting  a  real  weak- 


/tc\A^f^^M^Kju,.M^ 


LECT.  XI.]  THE  EXPLANATION :    QUALITIES.  163 

ness  in  the  pulpit.  As  strength  makes  itself  felt,  so 
does  weakness,  when  hearers  can  not  define  either,  or 
tell  their  sources.  It  matters  little  what  it  is,  a  weak- 
ness will  be  discovered.  The  common  people  may  know 
little  of  the  laws  of  interpretation,  but  they  will  dis- 
cover the  fact,  if  these  laws  are  often  violated  by  their 
religious  teachers.  First  in  the  form  of  a  suspicion, 
then  in  the  form  of  an  impression,  and  at  length  in  the 
form  of  a  conviction,  the  feeling  will  find  its  way  among 
them,  that,  whatever  else  their  pastor  may  be,  he  i^not 
a  safe  intei'preter  of  the  Scriptures.  He  adds  nothing 
to  their  knowledge  of  God's  word.  They  do  not  feel 
assured  of  his  accuracy  in  the  use  of  biblical  language. 
A  commentary  like  Barnes's  Notes  appeals  to  their 
common  sense  more  satisfactorily.  It  needs  no  argu- 
ment to  prove,  that,  if  this  is  the  silent  impression 
which  the  pulpit  makes  upon  a  people,  the  prestige  of 
that  pulpit  is  in  peril. 

You  will  be  struck  with  the  fact,  when  you  become 
familiar  with  the  ministry,  that  there  are  two  classes  of 
men  in  the  profession :  there  are  the  men  who  sustain 
the  pulpit,  and  the  men  whom  the  pulpit  sustains. 
There  are  preachers  whom  the  profession  carries.  They 
are  so  much  dead  weight.  They  add  nothing  to  its 
power  of  movement.  They  do  nothing  which  a  layman 
might  not  do  as  well.  As  laymen  themselves,  they 
would  be  as  useful  as  they  are,  except  for  this  fact,  — 
that  they  gam  something  from  the  glamour  of  profes- 
sional connections.  Such  men  are  the  first  to  be  over- 
whelmed by  the  rising  tide  of  biblical  thought  and 
biblical  enthusiasm  which  they  do  not  understand, 
and  of  which  they  can  make  no  use.  Infidelity  starts 
inquiries,  and  Christian  thought  seconds  them,  which 
such  men  can  not  answer.     Thev  can  only  plod  on  in 


\ 


'.64  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xi 

what  they  call  more  practical  ways,  and  in  time  the 
Church  drops  them.  Yet  a  moderate  amount  of  bibl* 
cal  learning,  kept  constantly  fresh  by  biblical  study, 
would  save  such  men. 

(5)  This  view  is  further  enforced  by  the  fact  that 
biblical  science  is  advancing  more  rapidly  than  any 
other  with  which  the  pulpit  has  directly  to  do.  No 
other  has  received  such  a  solid,  enduring  impulse  as 
this  has  during  the  last  fifty  years.  It  has  far  more 
palpable  results  of  progress  to  show  than  speculative 
theology.  One  cause  and  one  consequence  of  this  is 
the  constant  appearance  of  new  commentaries  and  other 
works  expository  of  the  Scriptures.  No  other  depart- 
ment of  sacred  learning  is  now  multiplying  books  so 
rapidly  as  this.  The  literature  of  it  changes  with  every 
decade  of  years.  Few  other  books  of  solid  worth  are 
so  soon  displaced  by  later  authorities  as  books  of  com- 
ment on  the  Bible.  In  no  other  department  does  a 
pastor's  library  need  such  frequent  weeding  and  replen- 
ishing as  in  this. 

This  rapidity  of  growth  in  biblical  science  is  vital  to 
the  tastes  and  habits  of  a  preacher.  Is  it  not  easy 
to  see  how  fatally  a  pastor  may  be  left  in  the  rear  of 
biblical  scholarship  ?  It  will  never  do  to  plod  on  in  old 
ways  of  exegesis,  content  with  the  ancient  interpreta- 
tions of  texts,  yet  hoping  to  be  sustained  as  religious 
authorities  with  the  people,  merely  because  we  build 
useful  sermons  on  such  interpretations.  You  might  as 
sensibly  teach  in  colleges  the  Ptolemaic  system  of  as- 
tronomy. A  preacher,  then,  has  a  very  significant  part 
of  his  life's  work  before  him  in  qualifying  himself  to 
explain  truthfully  the  meaning  of  his  texts. 


LECTURE  XII. 

THE    EXPLANATION:    QUALITIES. 

Having  discussed  the  topic  of  truthfulness  of  inter* 
pretation,  we  may  pass  more  rapidly  over  several  othei 
principles  which  should  regulate  the  qualities  of  expos- 
itory discourse. 

2d,  The  explanation  should  be  such  as  to  develop  the 
meaning  of  thetextJ^jts_fulLfQxce.  The  signification 
of  a  text  is  one  thing ;  its  significance,  another.  The 
signification  of  a  text  is  complete  when  its  words  are 
truthfully  interpreted,  and  its  grammatical  idea  ex- 
pressed. Its  significance  is  its  signification  clothed  in 
all  that  is  needful  for  vividness  of  impression.  Lord 
Brougham,  in  laying  down  rules  for  constructing  the 
narration  in  the  plea  of  a  lawyer,  insists  upon  that 
which  he  terms  "picturesque  expression."  A  similar 
quality  is  often  necessary  in  the  explanation  of  a  text. 
Purely  philological  processes,  though  underlying  every 
thing,  may,  in  many  cases,  be  the  least  part  of  the 
work  of  exposition.  Rhetorical  invention  must  often 
supplement  philology  very  largely  in  order  to  magidfy 
a  text  to  its  true  proportions. 

(1)  Picturesque  explanations  are  especially  neces- 
sary to  the  interpretation  of  an  ancient  volume  like 
the  Bible.  Th^  Scriptures  are  ancient,  not  antiquate<i.^ 
We  must  ^ee  them  as  we  see  the  heavens,  —  through  a 

165 


106  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xi- 

lens  of  large  magnifying  power.  We  must  bring  the 
distant  near,  must  make  the  ancient  fresh.  This  must 
be  done  by  the  highest  finish  of  art.  Do  we  exaggerate 
a  text  by  such  achievement  of  art  ?  Not  at  all,  in  any 
legitimate  use  of  it.  The  telescope  does  not  exaggerate 
the  size  and  brilliancy  of  Jupiter  in  the  evening  sky. 
We  only  approximate  the  truth,  even  thus. 

(2)  Picturesque  exposition  is  necessary,  also,  to  the 
interpretixtibn  of  a  foreign  volume  like  the  Bible.  We 
must  read  the  Bible  through  a  foreign  atmosphere. 
Language,  climate,  nationality,  customs,  politics,  sci- 
ences, almost  every  thing  that  can  give  idiosyncrasies 
to  a  book,  do  give  such  to  the  Scriptures.  And  their 
idiosyncrasies  are  not  our  idiosyncrasies.  To  us  they 
are  more  emphatically  a  foreign  volume  than  the  Iliad. 
Nor,  on  that  account,  is  the  Bible  unpractical  or  unfit. 
But  a  multitude  of  its  choicest  passages  do,  for  that 
reason,  depend,  for  their  significance  to  us,  upon  a  re- 
production to  our  vision^  of  thoSft  fnppigii  n^^prl ifipTTg  in 
which  they  had  their  origin. 

(3)  Picturesque  explanation  is  especially  necessary 
to  the  popular  mind.  The  people  need  to  have  done 
for  them  in  this  respect  that  which  a  scholar  can  do 
for  "himself.  The  people  can  often  determine  by  the 
force  of  common  sense  the  philological  meaning  of  a 
text,  when  they  have  neither  the  learning  nor  the 
imaginative  invention  which  are  necessary  to  fill  a 
text  with  its  true  significance.  The  pulpit  must  mod- 
ernize and  Americanize  texts,  and  thus  realize  them  to 
a 'modern  and  American  audience.  One  of  the  radical 
diversities  of  talents  in  the  ministry  concerns  this  power 
of  picturesque  exposition.  Some  preachers  are  admi' 
table  expository  critics :  other^are  expository  painters. 
It   is   not   difficult   to  foresee  from  which  of  the  two 

(/>u^    ;  tiU  aXcrvJ^  ^   ^'^■''^ 


t«CT.  xn.]        THE  EXPLANATION  :   QUALITIES. 

classes  the  great  preachers  must  come.  So  necessary 
is  some  degree  of  this  power  of  picturesque  invention 
to  a  versatile  eloquence  in  the  pulpit,  that  we  may 
almost  say  of  preachers  what  Alison  says  of  historians, 
—  that  there  never  was  a  truly  great  one  whose  talents  >^ 
would  not  have  made  him  eminent  as  a  painter  or  a  \ 
dramatic  poet. 

Here,  in  my  judgment,  is   the   hinge  of  the  whole 

question  of  expository  preaching.  Its  practicability 
depends  on  that  which,  for  distinction's  sake,  may  be 
termed  the  expository  culture  in  the  making  of  the 
preacher's  own  mind.  If  a  preacher  must  be  limited 
to  one  intellectual  talent  for  the  pulpit,  let  him  pray 
for  this.  The  preacher  who  has  it  in  any  large  degree 
is  always  a  power  in  the  pulpit.  He  is  always  among 
the  men  who  do  not  seek  places,  but  whom  places  seek. 

3d,  A  third  quality  of  the  explanation  is  that  it 
should  be  such  as  not  to  give  to  a  text  more  thanjts — 
fi41  force.  Ong  of  the  old  divines  calls  the  error  of 
exaggerating  exegesis  a  "bombarding  of  the  text." 
It  may  be  most  happily  illustrated  by  observing  several 
of  the  immediate  causes  of  it. 

(1)  One  of  these  is  an  abuse  ofj^xtual^reaching. 
A  man  who  always  preaches  textual  sermons  will  inev- 
itably "  bombard  "  some  texts.  Many  texts  otherwise 
good  do  not  naturally  furnish  the  textual  divisions  of 
a  good  sermon.  They  are  units.  You  can  not  divide 
them,  and  find  your  materials  of  thought  in  the  several 
clauses,  without  inventing  material  which  is  not  in 
them. 

(2)  Another  cause  of  exaggerated  explanation  is  un-     

chastened  rhetorical  painting.  An  example  will  illus- 
trate this.  On  the  text,  "  Hear,  ye  O  mountains,  the 
Lord's  controversy,"  an  English  preacher  indulges  in  a 


y.^--16^^^/  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.  [lect!^?!*^^,^^ 

prolonged  description  of  the  biblical  scenery  at  which 

the  text  hints.     The  word  "  mountain  "  is  sufficient  to 

reproduce  in  his  fancy  the  whole  picture  of  the  vale 

of  Chamouni.     God  and  man  are  arrayed  in  a  forensic 

debate   in  a  vast   amphitheater,  and   the   surrounding 

mountains  are  summoned  as  spectators   and   listenerB. 

The  description  is  so  elaborate  and  minute,  that   one 

who  has  seen  the  Alps  imagines  Mont  Blanc  and  the 

Aiguille  Verte   bending   in   attentive   silence   to  hear 

the  argument  'pro  and  con  between  the  infinite  and  the 

•  /       human  disputants.     Yet  the  more  vivid  the  picture  to 

^yxf^  the  fancy  of  the  reader,  the  more  positive  is  the  sense 

i  of  inflation  of  the  text.    The  text  is  a  brief  and  solitary 

hint.     Its    grandeur   consists    in    that   glimpse   which 

^  flashes  for  a  moment,  and  is  withdrawn.     That  is  all 

%  that  the  text  means.     In  that  momentary  gleam  of  sub- 

jTj        limity  its  full  force  is  given.     By  prolonged  expansion 

it  loses  force,  because  the  idea  will  not  brook  delay. 

It  is  like  lightning. ,  Fix  the  lightning  in  the  sky  long 
enough  to  describe  a  thunder-storm,  and  it  becomes  no 
more  than  a  streak  of  yellow  paint.  '  So  the  most  sub- 
lime and  poetic  hint  of  a  truth  may  dwindle  to  the 
veriest  humdrum  of  prose,  if  you  attempt  to  paint  it 
(vith  all  its  correlatives  and  auxiliaries.  A  more  chas- 
tened taste  in  rhetorical  description  would  save  a 
preacher  from  such  violence  to  biblical  poetry.  This 
is  one  of  a  thousand  instances  in  which  the  true  taste 
is  the  inspired  taste.     You  can  not  improve  it. 

(3)  Another  cause  of  the  error  before  us  is  the_aubi_ 
iection_cf  exegesis  to  the  service  of^polemic__the(ilogy. 
An  ancient  Calvinistic  divine  endeavored  to  prove  that 
the  Ten  Commandments  are  all  violated  by  a  belief  in 
Arminianism.  Arminians  make  a  divinity  of  man's 
power,  and  thus  break  tlie  First  Commandment.     They 


,^     L 


A-y^^   Jl-r^ 


LitcT.  xnj        THE  EXPLANATION :   QUALITIES.  169 

bow  down  to  this  idol  of  their  own  creation,  aad  thus 
break  the  Second  Commandment.  They  talk  of  'nefPec- 
tual  grace,  and  thus  take  God's  name  in  vain :  so  they 
break  the  Thiid  Commandment.  They  commit  spirit- 
ual adultery  with  their  idol,  and  thus  they  break  the 
Seventh  Commandment.  They  take  away  from  God 
the  dignity  which  is  his  due,  and  thus  they  break  the 
Eighth  Commandment.  They  covet  their  elect  neigh- 
bor's interest  in  Christ,  and  so  break  the  Tenth  Com> 
mandment.  A  similar  sport  is  carried  on  with  the 
whole  Decalogue,  as  if  the  chief  object  of  the  divine 
conference  with  Moses  on  Mount  Sinai  had  been  to  fur- 
nish him  with  rubbish  to  fling  at  Arminians.  Such 
biblical  exegesis  can  not  be  lifted  in  point  of  dignity 
above  the  sport  of  schoolboys. 

(4)  A  similar  cause  of  this  error  is  the  perversion 
of  the  Scriptures  to  uninspired  political  uses.  Lord 
Macaulay  relates  an  instance  of  the  preaching  of  the 
Bishop  of  Ely  before  the  court  of  King  James  II.  A 
passage  from  one  of  the  Chronicles  was  the  text,  and  it 
was  expounded  to  this  effect :  King  Solomon  represents 
King  James ;  Adonijah  was  undoubtedly  the  forerunner 
of  the  Duke  of  Monmouth;  Joab  was  a  Rye-house 
conspirator ;  Shimei  was  a  Whig ;  Abiathar  was  a  Cava- 
lier :  and  he  called  special  notice  to  two  clauses  in  the 
text,  one  of  which,  he  said,  implied  that  King  James 
was  superior  to  Parliament,  and  the  other,  that  he 
alone  had  command  of  the  militia. 

(5)  Yet  a  more  inexcusable  cause  of  the  error  before 
us  is  a  heedless  ignorance  of_biblical_foiCts.  A  preach- 
er a  few  years  ago,  wholeimagination  had  been  cul- 
tivated more  assiduously  than  his  biblical  learning, 
discoursed  upon  the  scene  which  took  place  between 
David  and  Abigail  on  the  occasion  on  which  she  came 


\ 


170  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.  [lect?.  xit 

out  to  meet  him  for  the  purpose  of  moderating  his 
anger  against  her  husband  Nabal.  The  preacher  dwelt 
in  glowing  terms  on  the  beauty  of  the  Carmelite  lady, 
and  described,  among  other  details  of  the  interview, 
her  appearance  as  she  approached  David  on  a  richly 
caparisoned  and  prancing  horse.  The  preacher  himseli 
\^as  noted  for  his  fondness  for  a  good  horse,  which,  in 
the  view  of  some  of  his  parishioners,  exceeded  the 
bounds  of  clerical  dignity ;  and,  as  he  dwelt  with  great 
zest  upon  the  equestrian  accomplishments  of  the  beau- 
tiful rider,  an  old  lady  in  the  congregation  gratified  her 
secret  distaste  for  that  feature  in  her  pastor's  character 
by  turning  to  her  neighbor,  and  whispering  that  the' 
sermon  was  "very  handsome,"  but  she  "knew  better," 
for  the  Bible  said  that  Nabal's  wife  came  out  to  meet 
David  "  on  an  ass."  That  horse  belonged  to  the  "  Mil- 
tonic  interpretation  "  of  the  Old  Testament. 

(6)  Another  cause  of  exaggerated  exegesis. is  an 
abuse  of  prophecy.  Dr.  Arnold  says  that  he  has  never 
read  a  commentary  on  the  prophecies  which  does  not, 
in  some  point  or  other,  distort  the  truth  of  history  to 
make  it  fit  the  prophecy.  Yet  the  pulpit  can  be  in 
this  respect  no  other  than  the  echo  of  commentaries. 
The  biblical  learning  of  the  pulpit  will  scarcely  ever 
rise  above  that  of  the  schools. 

(7)  Perhaps  the  most  violent  cause  of  the  error  iji 
question  is  found  in  the  abuse  of  the  Parables.  The 
pulpit  has  been  slow  to  learn  that  many  incidents  in 
the  Parables  teach  nothing.  They  are  expletive  inci- 
dents, thrown  in  to  round  out  the  story.  To  find  in 
tliem  a  profound  spiritual  sense  is  uninspired  manufac- 
ture of  thought.  Inspiration  and  bibliolatry  are  in  this 
respect  at  antipodes.  Bibliolatry  digs,  awestruck,  for 
the  occult  sense  of  words:  inspiration   is  calmly  con- 


oJJpU^ 


^ 


J  a^VUL4Lj>U  <#-^V.   7  rv^^^-^rJL 


I 


cwrr.  xn  ]        THE  EXPLANATION :    QUALITIES.  171 

tent  with  common  sense.  What  shall  we  say,  then,  of 
the  following  from  Bishop  Heber?  On  the  Parable 
of  the  Good  Samaritan,  he  says  that  the  traveler  repre- 
sents the  human  race  ;  his  leaving  Jerusalem  symbolizes 
man's  departure  from  God ;  Jericho  is  the  synonym  of 
the  temptations  of  this  world;  the  robbers  are  th6 
devil  and  his  angels ;  the  priest  signifies  the  sacrifices 
of  the  patriarchal  age ;  the  Levite  is  the  Mosaic  law ; 
and  the  Samaritan  is  Clu-ist.  The  bishop's  good  sense 
seems  to  have  halted  here.  He  adds,  not  as  the  discov- 
ery of  his  own  genius,  that  the  two  pieces  of  silver 
"have  been  supposed"  to  signify  the  two  sacraments 
which  are  left  behind  for  the  consolation  of  Christians, 
"till  their  good  Samaritan  shall  return."  Professor 
Stuart,  in  remarking  upon  this  specimen  of  exegesis, 
used  to  ask  whether  "  somebody  "  was  not  represented 
by  the  ass  on  which  the  Samaritan  rode.  Yet  Bishop 
Heber  was  a  sensible  man.  In  the  affairs  of  life  he 
called  water  water,  like  the  rest  of  us.  Why  should 
words  and  things  in  the  Scriptures  be  interpreted  and  / 
used  as  men  never  interpret  them  in  any  other  book,  or' 
in  the  colloquial  intercourse  of  life  ? 

Such  vagaries  as  these  were  once  regarded  as  a  part 
of  the  staple  of  the  pulpit.  By  the  ancient  standard  of 
pulpit  eloquence  the  ingenuity  of  such  conceits  marked 
the  rank  of  the  preacher.  The  more  original  his  inven- 
tion, the  more  authoritative  was  his  exegesis.  The 
theory  was  that  inspired  language,  because  it  was  in- 
spired, was  an  inexhaustible  mine  of  hidden  treasures 
of  the  fancy,  in  which  every  preacher  might  delve  at 
will.  He  was  the  prince  of  preachers  who  could  invent 
the  interpretation  least  likely  to  suggest  itself  to  the 
common  reader  or  to  be  supported  by  his  common 
Ben^e.     The  struggle  for  liberty  to  interpret  the  Scrip 


\ 


V^ 


I 


Jt^ 


172  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xil 

tures  by  the  rules  of  good  sense,  as  men  interpret  the 
language  of  other  books,  has  been  long  and  hard- 
fouglit ;  and  it  is  by  no  means  ended. 

4th,  A  fourth  quality  of  an  explanation  is  that  it 
"should  be  clear.  An  obscure  explanation  is  a  self-con- 
tradiction.    Several  causes  of  such  obsctirity  deserve 

ention. 

(1)  One  cause  is  ignorance  of  oriental  life  and  of 
ancient  civilization.  A  preacher  can  not  himself  under- 
stand certain  portions  of  the  Scriptures,  if  he  is  not 
familiar  with  Eastern  and  ancient  usages.  He  should  be 
a  well-informed  man  in  Asiatic  researches.  Even  when 
the  letter  of  a  text  is  not  misunderstood,  the  force 
of  it  may  be  lost  for  the  want  of  culture  in  the  depart- 
ment of  general  oriental  knowledge. 

(2)  Another  cause  of  obscurity  of  exposition  is  the 
needless  use  of  technical  phraseology.  Terms  techni- 
cafto  exegesis,  to  theology,  to  Christian  experience,  or 
even  to  biblical  usage,  should  be  employed,  if  at  all, 
with  caution.  The  Bible  itself  does  not  needlessly 
employ  them.  Even  technicalities  which  the  usage  of 
the  pulpit  has  made  common  are  not  always  understood ; 
if  understood,  they  are  but  dimly  so.  They  are  like 
windows  of  ground  glass. 

(3)  Another  occasion  of  obscurity  in  the  explana- 
tion is.  confusion  of  philosophical  distinctions.  It  is  a 
truism  that  the  Scriptures  are  not  inspired  to  teach 
philosophy.  Yet  philosophical  distinctions  underlie  all 
sound  exegesis,  as  they  do  the  interpretation  of  all  lan- 
guage. Such  distinctions  must  often  be  stated  to  save 
a  text  from  contradiction  of  other  texts,  or  of  the 
necessary  beliefs  of  men.  If,  therefore,  a  preacher  does 
not  admit  such  distinctions,  if  he  does  not  understand 
them,  if  they  are  overborne  by  his  theology,  if  he  daro 


LBcrr.  xji.]        THE  EXPLANATION :    QUALITIES.  173 

not  accept  them  courageously,  if  he  have  not  the  skil] 
to  make  them  clear  to  others,  he  may  leave  such  a  text 
more  obscure  than  he  found  it.  The  common  sense  of 
the  people  should  rather  be  let  alone  in  its  reception  of 
the  Scriptures  than  be  muddled  by  lame  philosophizing. 

As  specimens  of  such  texts,  may  be  named  passages 
respecting  depeiidence  and_ability ;  passages  respecting 
the  causes  of  sin,  like  that  concerning  the  hardening  of 
Pharaoh's  heart;  passages  respecting  providence_and 
decrees ;  passages  respecting  the  power  of  prayer ;  and 
passages  respecting  inherited  depravity.  Many  such 
texts  involve  the  whole  philosophy  of  the  human  will. 
To  explain  them  truthfully,  that  philosophy  must  not 
be  falsified  nor  ignored.  A  distinction  must  often  be 
stated,  when  it  is  not  expanded.  When  not  stated,  it 
must  often  be  implied  in  the  explanation.  The  preacher 
must  have  it  in  mind  unexpressed.  To  the  audience 
it  is  the  invisible  key.  The  door  does  not  open  unless 
the  key  is  turned  by  a  cunning  hand. 

(4)  A  further  cause  of  obscurity  in  exposition  is  the 
wan^jpf  naturalness  of  arrangement.  Have  you  never 
listened  to  expositions  in  which  the  preacher  seemed  to 
touch  ev*»r\-  thing,  and  explain  nothing  ?  He  handled 
even  Wx^g  vigorously,  it  may  be,  yet  nothing  so  as  to 
leave  a  definite  impression.  In  such  a  case  the  diffi- 
culty wil]  often  be  found  to  be  simply  the  want  of  nat 
mal  order.  Events  are  described,  not  in  their  actual, 
nor  in  any  probable,  order  of  occurrence.  Characters 
are  grouped  in  relations  which  are  not  proportional. 
Tliey  remind  one  of  a  certain  cartoon  by  Raphael,  in 
which  figures  of  half  a  ton's  weight  and  some  hundreds 
of  pounds  of  fishes  are  crowded  into  a  skifp  not  larger 
nor  more  seaworthy  than  a  Swampscott  dory.  The 
preacher  talks  at  random.     He  dances  from  the  great 


/ 


174  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [utor    xn. 

to  the  small,  from  the  near  to  the  remote,  from  the 
material  to  the  spiritual,  from  the  figurative  to  the  lit 
eral,  and  back  again,  and  forth  anew,  rambling  with 
no  order  which  seems  such  to  a  logical  mind.  IIo 
neglects  nothing,  yet  explains  nothing.  His  work  re- 
sults in  a  literary  kaleidoscope. 

5th,  A  fifth  quality  of  an  explanation  is  that  it 
should,  if  possible,  express  positive  opinions.  A  preach- 
er should,  if  possible,  have  an  opinion  of  his  text  for 
which,  as  an  exegete,  he  is  willing  to  be  responsible. 
The  following  particulars  are  worthy  of  note  on  this 
topic. 

(1)  By  far  the  major  part  of  the  Bible  is  suscepti- 
ble of  positive  interpretation.  Passages  unpracticable 
to  exegesis  are  comparatively  few:  not  one  exists, 
probably,  of  vital  moment.  A  preacher  will  find  no 
very  large  part  of  the  Bible  closed  to  faithful  biblical 
study.  Any  thing  which  is  thus  closed  to  him  is  not, 
for  the  time  being,  a  canonical  text  for  his  pulpit. 

(2)  Moreover,  expression  of  unsettled  opinions  of 
the  meanmg  of  the  Scriptures  does  great  injury  to  the 
pulpit.  The  pulpit  is  the  place  for  a  religigusuifiaiihfii. 
Some  degree  of  authoritative  instruction  is  essential  to 
its  power.  Hearers  have  a  right  to  expect  defined  and 
settled  convictions  from  one  whom  they  have  chosen 
as  their  instructor.  They  do  not  want  dogmatism ;  but 
they  do  demand,  and  justly,  confidence  of  judgment. 
A  man  is  not  "apt  to  teach"  who  does  not  know  what 
he  believes?  This  is  especially  true  when  the  meaning 
of  the  Scriptures  is  in  question.  If  the  pulpit  does  not 
know  its  own  ground  here,  to  the  people  it  will  seem 
to  know  nothing  to  the  purpose.  The  well-known  prin- 
ciple of  all  popular  oratory  is  applicable  here  also, — 
that  the  popular  faith  is  powerfully  affected  by  the  way 


LECT.  xn.]        THE  EXPLANATION:    QUALITIES.  175 

In  whicii  a  preacher  treats  the  foundation  of  his  opin 
ions.  Other  things  being  equal,  the  man  who  knows 
will  be  heard  in  preference  to  the  man  who  only  be- 
lieves. He  who  believes  will  be  heard  in  preference 
to  the  man  who  doubts.  The  Scriptures  are  the  foun- 
dation of  the  pulpit.  Texts  are  its  pillars.  In  exegesis, 
if  in  any  thing,  a  preacher  needs  confident  opinions. 
Unsettled  faith  there  ceases  to  be  faith  in  any  thing  else 
with  which  a  Christian  pulpit  is  concerned.  A  pulpit 
skeptical  as  to  the  Scriptures  becomes  a  floating  island: 
the  popular  faith  can  anchor  nothing  to  it. 

(3)  A  Calvinistic  theology,  especially,  requires  posi- 
ti^e  exegesis  on  the  part  of  its  preachers.  It  is  a  strong 
theology.  Say  whatever  else  we  may  of  it,  it  is  an 
oaken  theology.  Its  gnarled  branches  must  be  rooted 
in  a  deep  and  solid  soil.  Its  destiny  is  to  encounter 
tempests  of  the  moral  elements.  Its  life  must  be  far 
under  ground.  No  dawdling  exegesis  can  support  it ; 
nor  can  any  confidence  in  it  as  a  system  of  truth  be 
propagated  from  a  pulpit  which  does  not  know  whether 
it  finds  the  system  in  the  Scriptures  or  not.  We  must 
find  it  in  the  Scriptures,  or  nowhere.  We  must  know 
it  to  be  there,  or  the  people  will  soon  know  nothing 
about  it.  It  could  not  live  beyond  one  generation  in 
the  faith  of  a  people  who  should  be  thoroughly  pos- 
sessed of  the  skeptical  spirit  respecting  its  biblical 
foundations. 

(4)  The  ^actics  of  infidelity  demand  a  positive  exe- 
gesis in  the  pulpit.  I  allude  here  to  the  standing  charge 
of  infidelity,  —  that  the  Bible  is  not  a  self-consistent 
volume.  This  charge  is  often  very  eflfective  with  a  cer- 
tain ignorant  and  indolent  type  of  popular  skepticism. 
It  declares  that  the  Bible  is  an  instrument  on  whicb 
any  tune  can  be  played.     Learned  and  thoughtful  infi 


176  THE  THEORY  OF  PKE ACHING.  [i^Errr.  xn, 

delitj  knows  better  than  that;  but  that  is  the  most 
facile  way  of  neutralizing  the  biblical  argument  of  the 
clergy  with  an  unthinking  and  unlearned  commonalty. 
The  pulpit  must  rebut  the  charge,  not  by  loud-mouthed 
denials,  but  by  acting  upon  the  assumption  of  its  false- 
ness. Preachers,  by  having  positive  opinions  in  biblical 
interpretation,  and  by  expressing  them  positively,  will 
bear  down  the  charge.  They  need  not  pause  to  debate 
it. 

(5)  Turning,  now,  to  some  of  the  failures  of  preach- 
ers to  exhibit  a  positive  biblical  faith,  I  remark  that 
some  fail  unconsciously  by  a  skeptical  mannerism  in 
their  expositions.  Have  you  not  heard  one  explain  a 
text  with  the  forms  of  doubt,  when  nobody  doubts,  or 
can  doubt,  the  truth  of  the  explanation  ?  "  If  this  be 
the  meaning  of  the  Apostle ; "  "  This  seems  to  be  the 
idea  of  the  Prophet ; "  "  Such  may  be  supposed  to  be 
the  design  of  the  Psalmist ; "  "  Probably  our  Lord 
meant  to  teach,"  —  these  and  similar  formulae  of  doubt 
are  employed  when  there  is  no  reasonable  doubt. 
Commentators  on  the  passages  in  question  express  no 
doubt.  The  preacher  has  no  doubts.  He  speaks  from 
the  habit  of  affected  wisdom.  His  impulse  would  be  to 
speak  of  the  certainty  of  death  with  a  codicil  of  doubt 
in  the  case  of  a  long-lived  stock.  I  call  this  a  skepti- 
cal mannerism.  Contrast  it  with  the  robust  style  of 
apostolic  preaching :  "  I  am  persuaded ;  "  "  Hereby  we 
know;"  "I  say  the  truth  in  Christ;"  "We  have  the 
mind  of  Christ;"  "Know  ye  not?"  "I  have  received 
of  the  Lord  that  which  I  delivered  unto  you ; "  "  We 
use  great  plainness  of  speech ;  "  "  Great  is  my  boldness 
of  speech ;  "  "  The  Spirit  speaketh  expressly ;  "  "  We 
know;  we  are  confident,  I  say;"  "Thus  saith  the 
Lord."     In  such  varied  and  intense  forms  of  speech  the 


Uicr,  XII.]        THE  EXPLANATION :    QUALITIES.  177 

inspired  preachers  express  intense  convictions.  Theirs 
is  an  indubitable  message.  The  Epistles  of  the  New 
Testament  seem  as  if  written  under  oath. 

(6)  Failure  in  point  of  positiveness  of  exegesis  some- 
times results  from  constitutional  timidity  of  opinion. 
In  some  minds  original  opinions  are  always  the  result 
of  a  trembling  balance  of  probabilities.  Which  way 
the  scale  preponderates  never  seems  absolutely  certain. 
The  opponents  of  Dr.  Arnold  used  to  say  of  him, — 
though  on  what  grounds  I  can  not  imagine, — that  he 
always  woke  up  in  the  morning  with  the  conviction 
that  every  thing  was  an  open  question. 

(7)  In  other  cases,  the  failure  arises  from  an  over- 
bearing of  the  speculative  upon  the  exegetical  taste. 
The  history  of  the  religious  opinions  of  some  men  is 
almost  exclusively  a  dogmatic  history.  They  have 
come  at  their  opinions  through  the  avenue  of  specula- 
tion, not  through  that  of  exegesis,  but  substantially  to 
the  exclusion  of  exegesis.  Consequently  for  a  long 
time,  perhaps  for  a  lifetime,  biblical  interpretation  is 
of  practically  no  account  in  their  habit  of  thinking. 
Such  minds  make  inefficient  exegetes  in  the  pulpit. 
They  are  so  much  bolder  as  theologians  than  as  exe- 
getes, they  speculate  so  much  more  confidently  than 
they  interpret,  they  are  so  much  more  at  home  in  natu- 
ral than  in  revealed  theology,  and  in  revealed  the- 
ology they  are  so  much  more  fond  of  its  catechetical 
than  of  its  biblical  forms,  that,  in  the  interpretation 
of  the  Scriptures,  they  never  make  the  impression  of 
authorities. 


LECTURE  XIII. 

THE  EXPLANATION  :   QUALITIES. 

6th,  Continuing  the  discussion  of  the  qualities  ol 
the  explanation,  we  notice,  as  a  sixth  quality,  unity  of 
rexposition.  This  is  an  exceedingly  subtile  quality. 
we  may  sacrifice  it  unconsciously. 

(1)  It  is  often  sacrificed  by  the  want  of  unity  of  text. 
If  a  text  be  a  double,  triple,  quadruple  structure,  no 
oneness  can  grow  out  of  it.  Any  discussion  of  such  a 
text  will  resemble  the  rattling  of  a  handful  of  marbles. 
This  suggests  one  secret  of  failure  in  expository  preach- 
ing. I  once  proposed  to  an  association  of  clergymen 
the  inquiry,  what  their  .-chief  difficulty  was  in  such 
preaching;  and  their  answer  almost  unanimously  was 
"The  want  of  unity."  For  this  reason  the}^  could  not 
interest  in  that  kind  of  preaching,  either  their  hearers 
or  themselves.  The  problem  is  how  to  interweave  the 
textual  materials  into  one  fabric,  ^he  sermon  is  apt 
to  be  a  string  of  beads  with  nothing  but  the  string  to 
make  them  one.  j  The  preacher's  instinct  for  unity  of 
aim  is  balked  at  the  outset,  and  the  hearer's  instinct 
for  singleness  of  impression  is  balked  in  the  end. 

Where  lies  the  remedy?  I  answer,  it  lies  inflimiting 
expository  preaching  to  passages  of  the  Scriptures 
which  have  unity  of  structureTX  Leave  more  desultory 
methods  of  exposition  to  Bible-classes.      Reserve   for 

178 


LKCT.  xm.]       THE  EXPLANATION :    QUALITIES.  179 

the  jmlpit  only  such  paragraphs  of  inspired  material 
is  admit  of  unity  of  discussion.  Search  for  groups  of 
inspired  thoughts.  These  are  very  abundant.  Often, 
expository  treatment  of  them  is  the  very  best  that  can 
be  given,  —  the  richest,  the  most  original^  the  most  in- 
teresting, the  most  useful.  A  young  preacher's  vexed 
problem  of  originating  materials  of  sermons  is  solved 
when  he  makes  the  discovery  of  the  inexhaustible  re- 
sources of  the  Bible  in  unified  passages.  Many  a  group 
of  biblical  verses  has  as  definite  a  unity  as  a  constella 
tion  in  the  heavens.  You  will  soon  be  surprised  and 
delighted  by  your  discovery  of  the  extent  to  which  the 
Scriptures  can  be  mapped  out  in  such  groups.  No 
preacher  need  despair  of  success  in  expository  preach- 
ing for  the  want  of  good  homiletic  material  for  it. 

(2)  Unity  of  explanation  is  often  sacrificed  by  a 
aeedless  suggestion  of  conflicting  interpretations. 
Sometimes  a  contested  passage  may  need  this  method. 
In  the  majority  of  cases,  however,  it  is  not  needed ;  and, 
if  not  necessary,  it  is  impolitic.  We  have  no  occasion 
for  our  enemy's  guns,  unless  we  can  shift  them  around. 
Why  take  the  trouble  to  spike  them  even,  if  they  can 
not  be  used  against  us?  Homiletic  policy  does  not 
admit  that  it  is  a  matter  of  indifference  whether  hearers 
shall  receive  impression  from  one  force,  or  from  four. 
It  admits  of  no  such  self-counteracting  and  disjointing 
process  of  instruction.  A  mind  intent  on  one  object 
does  n^t  work  so.  Such  a  mind  marches  to  its  object 
by  one  path :  it  chooses  its  own  path :  it  shuts  out  all 
needless  glimpses  of  divergent  and  opposite  avenues. 
So  far  a  preacher  is  an  advocate,  notji  judge. 

(3)  Unity  of  explanation  is  also  sacrificed  by  irrele- 
vant verbal  exposition.  I  have  here  in  mind  one  of 
the  most  singular  indulgences  of  pedantry  that  has  e^<?r 


180  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xm 

afflicted  oral  speech.  It  is  that  of  huntJBg  a  word 
through  its  whole  philological  history  in  the  Scriptures. 
A  few  instances  occur  in  which  the  true  meaning  of  a 
word  is  a  growth  which  can  be  determined  only  by 
Buch  historical  pursuit.  "Baptize,"  "ransom,"  "jus- 
tify," "  sacrifice  "  are  specimens  of  suich  words.  They 
are  the  crucial  words  of  certain  texts,  some  of  which 
are  the  crucial  texts  of  systems  of  theology.  But  such 
words  are  rare ;  and  the  usage  to  which  I  refer  is  not 
limited  to  them,  nor  to  any  choice  selection.  It  has 
spread  itself  enormously,  until,  in  some  pulpits,  it  has 
become  the  stereotyped  and  only  method  of  exposition. 
Critical  commentary  is  thus  imported  whole  into  ser- 
mons, with  no  reference  at  all  to  any  homiletic  demand. 
The  emphatic  word,  and  sometimes  a  word  which  has 
Qot  even  the  dignity  of  emphasis,  is  pursued  with  philo- 
logical fur}^  up  and  down  and  across  t"ie  biblical 
records.  Homiletically  the  result  is  a  ludicrous  com- 
pound of  dullness  and  irrelevancy. 

An  example  will  most  clearly  define  this  error.  You 
will  see  from  it  that  my  description  is  no  caricature  of 
fact.  A  Presbyterian  clergyman  in  a  Southern  city 
once  preached  a  sermon  on  these  words,  "  It  containeth 
much."  The  text  was  a  fragment  broken  from  a  verse 
in  the  Book  of  Ezekiel,  "  Thou  shalt  drink  of  thy  sis- 
ter's cup  :  ...  it  containeth  much."  The  passage  is  a 
comminatory  one  addressed  to  the  ancient  people  of 
God.  The  preacher,  probably  in  that  vacuity  of 
thought  which  is  apt  to  dilute  the  beginnings  of  ser- 
mons, pounced  upon  the  word  "  it,"  which  had  the  dis- 
Vjiction  of  heading  the  text.  He  remarked,  that,  as 
the  context  indicated,  "  the  word  had  for  its  antecedent 
the  word  '  cup.'  '  Thy  sister's  cup :  it  containeth 
much : '  thou  shalt  drink  of  it ;  of  thy  sister's  cup  shalt 


CKCT.  XIII.]       THE  EXPLANATION:    QUALITIES.  181 

thou  drink;  it  containeth  much:  a  full  cup,  brethren,, 
it  containeth  much:  yes,  thou  shalt  drink  of  thy  sis- 
ter's cup ;  it  containeth  much,  —  these  are  the  words  of 
our  text." 

I  give  you  in  the  rough  my  impressions  of  the  ser- 
mon after  thirty  years,  not  claiming  verbal  accuracy. 
Tlie  impression  of  the  exposition,  however,  which  has 
remained  in  my  mind,  justifies  this  inane  mouthing  of 
the  text  as  the  preliminary  to  the  following  exposition. 
The  exeges/3  of  the  word  "  cup  "  was  the  burden  of  it. 
I  do  not  exaggerate  in  saying  that  he  told  us  of  the 
great  variety  of  senses  in  which  the  word  "  cup "  is 
used  in  the  Scriptures.  A  marvelous  word  is  it.  The 
Bible  speaks  of  the  "  cup  of  salvation,"  and,  again,  of 
the  "  cup  of  consolation ;  "  then  it  is  the  ''  cup  of  trem- 
bling," and  the  "  wine-cup  of  fury."  Babylon  is  called 
a  "  golden  cup."  The  cup  of  Joseph  which  was  hidden 
in  the  sack  of  Benjamin  was  a  "  silver  cup."  The 
Pharisees,  we  are  told,  "  made  clean  the  outside  of  the 
cup ;  "  and,  "  he  shall  not  lose  his  reward  who  giveth  a 
cup  of  cold  water  in  the  name  of  a  disciple."  And 
therefore  in  the  text  we  are  told,  "  Thou  shalt  drink 
of  thy  sister's  cup  :  it  containeth  much."  The  preacher 
rambled  on  in  this  manner,  with  his  finger  on  the  right 
page  of  the  concordance,  till  at  last  the  sound  of  the 
word  "  cup  "  was  made  familiar  to  the  audience ;  and 
having  accumulated,  as  I  have  in  this  paragraph,  a 
respectable  bulk  of  "sounding  brass,"  the  preacher 
annjunced  as  his  subject  of  discourse  the  future  pun- 
ishment of  the  wicked. 

(4)  Unity  of  explanation  may  be  sacrificed  by  erro- 
neous representations  of  the  "  double  sense  "  of  certain 
biblical  passages.  This  is  a  peculiarity  of  biblical 
style  which  it  is  (exceedingly  difficult  to  define  clearlj 


182  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lkct.  xm 

to  the  popular  mind.  Few  commentators  succeed  well 
in  defining  it  to  the  clerical  mind.  Preachers  may 
destroy  the  unity  of  impression  made  by  the  explana^ 
tion  of  the  passages  in  question,  in  either  of  two  ways. 
One  is  that  of  distinguishing  the  two  senses  of  the 
language  too  literally.  The  theory  of  the  double  sense, 
which  some  advance,  borders  hard  on  the  Swedenbor- 
f;ian  principle  of  exterior  and  interior  interpretation. 
Senses  absolutely  independent  of  each  other  are  at- 
tributed to  the  words  of  a  text,  with  no  reason  for  tlie 
double  sense  which  is  palpable  to  common  sense.  A 
recondite  sense  superinduced  upon  an  obvious  sense, 
a  spiritual  sense  affixed  to  a  literal  sense,  a  prophetic 
sense  subjoined  to  a  declarative  sense,  —  such  is  the 
"double  sense"  as  a  hearer  obtains  it  from  some  pulpits. 

The  popular  mind  is  impatient  of  mystic  laws  of 
speech,  of  which  it  finds  no  parallel  in  popular  usage. 
It  can  not  be  made  to  see  why  two  such  interpretations 
should  be  injected  into  the  same  words  with  any  more 
consistency  or  continuity  of  thought  than  three  or 
thirty.  The  door  seems  open  to  Swedenborg,  or  any 
other  maniacal  interpreter,  if  such  a  theory  of  the 
double  sense  be  recognized.  The  people,  therefore,  dis- 
miss Swedenborg  none  the  less,  but  the  double  sense 
as  well. 

The  true  theory  of  the  double  sense,  as  I  under- 
stand it,  always  involves  the  idea  of  type  and  antitype. 
This  is  not  undisputed,  and  I  can  not  pause  to  defend 
it :  I  can  only  explain  it.  The  senses  of  the  language 
are  uot  arbitrarily  two :  they  are  reasonably  twofold. 
The  reason  is  obvious.  The  language  is  true  of  the 
type,  first  for  what  it  is  in  itself,  then  because  it  is  the 
type  of  something  to  come  after  in  the  order  of  time. 
And  to  that  antitype  it  passes  over  with  an  expanded 


LKOT.  xin.]       THE  EXPLANATION:    QUAJiTIES.  183 

and  a  deepened  meaning.  Was  a  Messianic  Psalm  true 
of  David?  Yes.  How?  First  on  his  own  account 
and  as  a  literal  expression  of  his  own  experience ;  then 
because  he  was  a  type  of  the  Messiah ;  and  therefore 
its  meaning  passes  on  to  a  wider  and  profounder  appli- 
cation to  Christ.  The  one  application  is  an  outgrowth 
of  the  other.  It  is  the  prolongation,  or,  as  the  Scrip- 
tures so  often  pronounce  it,  the  fulfillment,  of  the  other. 
A  certain  continuity  of  thought  connects  them.  Stand- 
ing back  of  the  type,  we  look  through  the  language 
descriptive  of  it  to  the  antitype,  as  if  in  perspective. 
They  lie  in  the  same  line ;  the  first  being  suggestive  of 
the  second,  and  the  second  the  fullness  of  the  first. 

This  is  a  conception  of  the  double  sense,  —  is  it  not  ? 
—  which  can  be  made  intelligible  to  the  popular  mind 
without  violence  to  its  common  sense.  A  reason  is 
obvious  why  two,  and  only  two,  senses  should  be  at- 
tributed to  the  language.  It  is  a  conceptioi\  which 
helps  marvelously  the  interpretation  of  some  of  the 
Psalms,  and  some  of  the  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  some  of  our  Lord's  predictions  of  the  final 
judgment.  I  have  called  it  a  peculiarity  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. To  what  extent  it  may  be  called  a  fundamental 
law  of  language  in  the  interpretation  of  history  is  an 
open  question.  Natural  science  has  revealed  a  similar 
law  of  type  and  antitype  in  the  successions  of  natui.il 
history,  which  very  strikingly  reminds  one  of  the 
double  sense  of  the  Scriptures.  Whether  or  not  it 
runs  into  all  history  in  any  such  way  as  to  make  itself 
intelligible  in  the  philosophy  of  events  is  an  interesting 
query.  That  the  Scriptures  recognize  it  in  certain 
grand  responses  between  the  Old  Testament  and  the 
New  is  beyond  reasonable  dispute.  Nothing  of  the 
ityle  of  innuendo,  or  of  play  upon  words,  degrades  it 


r 


184  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect    xm. 

The  same  language  expresses  two  things,  because  they 
are  alike,  and  are  divinely  constituted  in  certain  corre- 
spondences to  each  other  in  the  eternal  order. 

The  other  method  by  which  the  theory  of  the  double 
sense  may  be  made  to  sacrifice  unity  of  exposition  is 
that  of  leaving  the  full  sense  of  the  text  in  obscurity. 
The  difficulty  here  is  a  want  of  didactic  vigor  in  the 
preacher.  If  he  have  optical  vigor  so  that  he  sees  for 
himself,  he  has  not  power  to  make  others  see  through 
the  media  of  his  exposition.  A  cloud  is  left  overhang- 
ing the  text  in  any  sense.  Passages  to  which  the  theory 
of  the  double  sense  is  applicable  are  difficult  themes 
for  the  pulpit  at  the  best.  We  may  prudently  defer 
the  treatment  of  them  till  we  are  confident  of  our 
power  to  make  them  clear. 

7th,  A  seventh  quality  of  an  explanation  is  that  it 
should  be  as  concise  as  clearness  and  fullness  will  per- 
mit. Whatever  value  conciseness  has  in  any  thing  it 
has  with  special  emphasis  in  expository  discoiirse. 

(1)  Observe  especially  that  in  a  topical  sermon  the 
explanation  is  a  preliminary.  Like  all  other  prelimina- 
ries, it  should  be  dispatched  rapidly. 

(2)  In  either  a  topical  or  an  expository  sermon,  con- 
ciseness itself  stimulates  interest.  It  is  an  interest- 
ing virtue  in  the  explanation  of  any  thing,  that  it  be 
given  briskly.  Condense.  Make  every  word  signifi- 
cant. Say  nothing  in  a  rotary  way.  Let  every  step  be 
an  advance.  Hearers  are  pleased  with  you,  and  pleased 
irith  your  subject,  and  pleased  with  themselves,  if  they 
find  themselves  able  to  seize  your  thought  nimbly. 
Have  you  not  been  sensible  of  the  difi'erence  in  this 
respect  between  different  expounders  ?  One  wiU  pare 
and  peel  and  slice  and  scrape  a  text,  as  if  it  were 
an  apple.     Another  will  crack  it  as  if  it  were  a  nu^ 


UECT.  xni.]       THE  EXPLANATION:    QUALITIES.  185 

With  the  one,  you  mast  bide  your  time :  the  othei 
gives  you  no  time  to  spare.  You  have  no  question 
which  quickens  your  interest  the  more  skillfully. 

(3)  In  no  part  of  a  discourse  is  the  temptation  to 
indolent  composition  more  insidious  than  in  the  ex- 
planation. The  very"  nature  of  the  process  invites 
delay.  We  often  dally  with  an  explanatory  thought 
when  we  should  not  think  of  doing  so  with  a  link  in  an 
argument.;  Even  an  illustration  tells  us  more  plainly 
when  we  have  done  with  it,  and  motions  to  us  to  pass 
on.  Nothing  but  exhortation  equals  the  explanation 
in  its  allurements  to  long-winded  speech.  Some  of  the 
most  decisive  failures  in  expository  preaching  are  due 
largely  to  its  length.  If  any  doubt  exists  as  to  the 
interest  of  an  audience  in  an  expository  discourse,  con- 
dense ;  pack  your  thoughts ;  shorten  the  process ;  make 
haste ;  come  quickly  to  the  gist  of  things ;  and  you  are 
sure  of  one  element  of  success.  This  simple  expedient 
will  often  save  an  expository  sermon  from  falling  flat. 

(4)  Conciseness  of  explanation  is  sacrificed  in  several 
ways.    One  is  by  explaining  things  which  in  themselves     f 
need  no  explanation.     We  shall  notice  again  the  petti- 
fogging method  of  explanation.     I  name  it  now  only  as 
contributing  to  needless  expansion. 

Another  method  is  by  explaining  things  of  which  an  ( 
explanation  is  not  demanded  by  the  use  which  is  to  be 
mad*  of  the  text.  The  distinction  which  we  have  ob- 
serrea  between  the  work  of  the  preacher  and  that  of  the 
commentator  is  forgotten.  Much  that  deserves  exposi- 
tion may  not  demand  it  now.  No  homiletic  necessity 
for  it  may  exist  in  the  aim  of  the  sermon :  if  so,  no 
exegetical  demand  at  present  concerns  the  preacher  or 
the  hearer.  Take,  for  example,  the  text,  "  The  times 
of  this  ipjnorance  God  winked  at,  but  now  command- 


186  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xni 

eth  all  men  everywhere  to  repent."  Suppose  that  you 
preach  a  sermon  from  that  text  on  the  obligation  of  all 
men  to  repent.  Why  should  you  dwell  on  the  phrase 
"winked  at"?  Why  expand  at  all  the  principle  of 
God's  toleration  of  evils  in  one  age  which  he  condemns 
in  another  ?  Why  say  any  thing  of  the  first  half  of 
the  text?  Why  not  proceed  at  once  to  the  last  half  as 
containing  the  germ  of  your  sermon  ?  It  does  so,  and 
(every  thing  back  of  it  is,  for  your  purpose,  rubbish. 
Yet  probably  four  out  of  five  of  the  sermons  preached 
on  this  standard  text  begin  with  a  more  or  less  elabo- 
rate discussion  of  the  principle  involved  in  the  phrase 
"  winked  at."  Why  is  this  ?  Only  because  this  phrase 
suggests  an  easy  beginning.  It  ..points  to  something  to 
say.  It  is  the  prop  underneath  the  keel,  which,  knocked 
away,  permits  the  vessel  to  launch.  That  is  to  say,  the 
reason  of  the  unnecessary  exposition  is  vacuity  of 
thought  in  the  mind  of  the  preacher.  Keep  to  your 
text,  not  as  an  independent  passage,  but  as  a  text.  Use 
it  for  your  aim,  nothing  more.  Act  the  preacher,  not 
the  commentator. 

J^^hird  method  by  which  conciseness  of  explana- 
tion may  be  sacrificed  is  by  dwelling  needlessly  upon 
thiAgs  incidental  to  the  text.  Tediousness  in  the  detail 
of  familiar  facts  bearing  feebly  on  the  homiletic  pur- 
pose unstrings  the  tension  of  interest  in  the  early  part 
of  many  sermons.  Just  then  and  there,  when  and 
where  you  need  to  accumulate  md  to  husband  resources 
Df  interest,  this  error  often  introduces  a  debilitating 
prolixity  which  makes  the  whole  discourse  flabby. 
Try  the  criticism  on  some  of  your  own  sermons.  See 
if  a  brisk  hint  at  the  scenes  of  a  very  familiar  parable 
is  not  of  more  worth  to  your  conclusion  than  a  labori- 
ous recapitulation  of  them.     Make  the  experiment  of 


Uicrr.  xra.]       THE  EXPLANATION :    QUALITIES.  187 

trusting  somethiiig  to  the  intelligence  and  the  memory 
of  your  hearers  respec  ting  a  miracle  which  they  know 
by  heart.  "  Mr.  Jones,"  said  Chief  Justice  Marshall 
on  one  occasion,  to  an  attorney  who  was  rehearsing 
to  the  Court  some  elementary  principle  from  Black- 
stone's  Commentaries,  ''there  are  some  things  which 
the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  may  be  pre- 
sumed to  know."  Many  an  audience  would  give  the 
same  reproof  to  some  expository  preachers,  if  the} 
could,  \lheir  defenseless  position  should  shield  them 
from  assumptions  of  their  ignorance  which  they  can 
not  resent.  Be  generous,  therefore,  to  the  intelligence 
of  your  hearers.  Assume  sometimes  that  they  know 
the  Lord's  Prayer.  Do  not  quote  the  Ten  Command- 
ments as  if  they  had  been  revealed  to  you,  instead  of 
Moses.  The  Sermon  on  the  Mount  is  a  very  ancient 
specimen  of  moral  philosophy :  do  not  cite  it  as  if  it 
were  an  enactment  of  the  last  Congress.  The  Parables 
are  older  than  the  "Meditations"  of  Aurelius  Anto- 
ninus .  why,  then,  rehearse  them  as  if  from  the  proof- 
sheets  of  the  first  edition  ?  In  a  word,  why  suffer  the 
minds  of  your  audience  to  be  more  nimble  than  your 
own,  and  to  outrun  you  ?     ') 

A  fourth  method  by  which  conciseness  of  exposition 
is  sacrificed  is  by  evasion  of  the  real  difficulties  of  a 
text.  Explanation  which  is  afraid  of  its  own  aim  is 
apt  to  spin  itself  out  in  wretched  commonplaces.  Did 
you  ever  watch  the  last  expiring  spurt  of  an  engine- 
hose  whose  power  is  spent?  How  it  droops,  and 
splashes,  and  wriggles,  and  drips,  and  drizzles,  and  spits, 
and  gurgles,  and  wets  everybody,  sending  a  jet  where  it 
is  least  expected,  and  wasting  its  contents  in  puddles, 
until  everybody  frets,  and  is  glad  when  it  stops  I  Like 
that  are  expositions  which  expound  nothing. 


188  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lbct.  xm 

Y  8th,  An   explanation   should    preserve    the    dignity 

V      /    which  is  becominer  to  the  treatment  of  insDired  thousrht 


f^ 


which  is  becoming  to  the  treatment  of  inspired  thought 
Believers  in  inspiration  repel  debasement  of  it  in  expo 
sition  as  they  do  in  the  choice  of  texts. 

(1)  It  is,  therefore,  a  homiletic  error  to  explain  that 
which  needs  no  explanation.  This  error  not  only  de- 
stroys conciseness,  but  it  chiefly  offends  the  dignity  of 
expository  speech.  It  degrades  exposition  to  puttei 
over  it  in  a  pettifogging  way,  trusting  nothing  to  the 
good  sense  of  an  audience,  and  assuming  nothing  as 
already  known  to  them.  On  the  text,  "  I  am  the  good 
shepherd,"  said  a  preacher  in  the  chapel  of  this  Semi- 
nary,—and  that  after  twenty  years  of  experience  in 
the  pulpit,  —  "a  sheep,  my  brethren,  is  a  very  defense- 
less animal.  A  shepherd  is  one  who  takes  care  of 
sheep."  If  a  New  England  audience  can  not  be  sup- 
posed to  know  what  a  sheep  is,  what  do  they  know? 
Simplicity  in  preaching  is  not  driveling. 

In  gauging  the  intelligence  of  an  audience,  we  must 
take  into  account  the  popular  use  of  commentaries. 
Some  of  these  have  had  an  immense  circulation. 
Barnes's  Notes  alone  have  been  circulated  to  the  extent 
of  a  million  of  copies.  That  which  fifty  years  ago 
would  have  been  an  addition  to  the  biblical  knowledge 
of  the  people  may  not  be  such  now.  A  serious  diffi- 
culty attending  expository  preaching  now  arises  from 
the  familiarity  of  multitudes  with  the  most  significant 
parts  of  the  Bible.  He  must  be  a  learned  biblical 
scholar  who  can  add  any  thing  to  the  biblical  knowl- 
edge of  some  hearers. 

(2)  Another  offense  against  dignity  of  exposition 
is  the  suggestion  of  fanciful  interpretations.  What 
shall  be  said  of  this  example  from  Dr.  Gill?  In  ex- 
pounding the  phrase  "Abba  Father."  he  remarks  that 


UDOT.  xm.]       THE  EXPLANATION:    QUALITIES.  189 

the  word  "abba"  reads  the  same  spelled  backwards 
or  forwards,  and  that  "this  suggests  that  (xod  is  our 
Father  in  adversity  as  well  as  in  prosperity."  Suggests 
to  whom?  To  anybody  but  the  Rev.  Dr.  Gill?  We 
can  readily  conceive  how  it  should  have  disgusted  a 
robust  mind  like  Robert  Hall's,  and  led  him  to  say  to 
a  Welshman  who  expressed  the  wish  that  Dr.  Gill's 
works  had  been  written  in  Welsh,  "I  wish  so,  too,  sir; 
for  then  I  never  should  have  wasted  my  time  and 
patience  in  reading  them." 


/      . 


/ 


<ll 


LECTURE  XIV. 

THE  EXPLANATION:   QUALITIES,   LOCALITr. 

9th,  Continuing  the  discussion  of  the  qualities  of 
the  explanation,  we  remark  in  the  ninth  place,  that 
over  against  the  conservative  principle  of  the  dignity 
of  exposition,  considered  in  the  last  lecture,  must  be 
admitted  another;  namely,  that  exposition  should  be 
jnade  interesting.  It  is  a  truism  that  dignity  and  dull- 
ness are  often  synonymous.  Have  you  not  observed 
that  the  act  of  yawning  closes  the  inner  chamber  of 
the  ear,  so  that  you  are  partially  deafened  by  it  ?  That 
is  as  true  morally  as  it  is  physiologically.  We  may, 
therefore,  better  tolerate  a  respectable  eccentricity 
than  be  afflicted  with  tameness. 

(1)  To  promote  interest  in  expository  preaching,  cul- 
tivate the  "picturesque  expression"  recommended  by 
Lord  Brougham.  Regulated  by  a  chastened  taste,  that 
will  insure  interest.  Dr.  Arnold  is  represented  by  his 
pupils  at  Rugby  as  having  been  in  his  biblical  dis- 
courses the  freshest  man  they  ever  knew.  One  of  his 
pupils  writes  of  him,  "  Our  Lord's  life  and  death  were 
to  him  the  most  interesting  facts  that  ever  happened ;  as 
real,  as  exciting,  as  any  recent  event  in  history.  His 
rich  mind  filled  up  the  naked  outline  of  the  gospel." 
That  was  the  secret,  —  ''his  rich  mind."  If  a  preach- 
er's mind  is  filled  with  biblical  stores,  and  cultivated 

190 


LBOT.  XTV.]       THE  EXPLANATION :   QUALITIES.  191 

in  biblical  tastes,  and  alive  with  interest  in  biblical 
history,  biography,  prophecy,  so  that  Gethsemane  and 
Calvary  are  as  real  to  him  as  Waterloo  and  Gettysburg, 
he  can  scarcely  fail  to  make  expository  preaching  inter- 
esting. 

(2)  Certain  expedients  of  study  are  valuable  aids  to 
the  faculty  of  interesting  exposition.  Of  these,  one  is 
familiarity  with  books  of  Eastern  travel.  A  preacher 
should  know  something  of  the  latest  literature  of  ori- 
ental travel  and  exploration.  A  fresh  mind  must  have 
fresh  food.  Another  expedient  is  a  study  of  the  old 
English  pulpit.  Not  for  accuracy  of  exegesis,  but  for 
the  means  of  clothing  it  in  forms  which  will  allure  the 
popular  mind,  the  old  English  preachers  are  excellent 
helpers.  They  were  not  trustworthy  exegetes;  but 
they  abound  with  fresh  illustrations,  original  uses  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  quaint  remarks  in  the  way  of  comment. 
The  events  and  characters  of  the  Old  Testament  es- 
pecially were  very  real  to  their  imagination.  Familiar- 
ity with  them  will  put  a  preacher  in  possession  of  much 
material  of  biblical  illustration,  which,  whatever  else 
may  be  said  of  it,  was  fresh  and  pithy  and  luminous. 
A  quotation  from  that  source  may  sometimes  be  the  one 
tiling  wanting  to  light  up  a  modern  exposition,  and 
make  it  interesting  to  modern  hearers. 

Again:  a  department  of  a  commonplace  book  may 
be  made  a  valuable  help  to  the  interest  of  expository 
sermons.  Collections  of  biblical  miscellanies,  facts  of 
science,  incidents  of  travel,  original  comments,  quota- 
tions, anecdotes,  infidel  concessions,  uses  of  certain 
texts  by  illustrious  preachers,  uses  of  other  passages 
on  certain  death-beds,  notes  of  certain  conversions  at- 
tributable to  specific  texts,  connections  of  other  text*' 
with  Christian  hymnology,  missionary  exneriences  in  tl^ 


r 


192  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xtt 

ase  of  others,  —  in  brief,  every  thing  of  a  miscellaneoua 
character  which  explains,  or  illustrates,  or  enforces,  oi 
magnifies,  or  adorns  any  scriptural  passage,  is  worth 
"preserving. 

(3)  A  preacher  needs  courage  to  use  the  common 
stock  of  expository  thought.  There  is  no  need  oi 
gtraining  after  expository  conceits.  Here,  as  elsewhere, 
the  common  stock  of  thought  is  the  great  bulk  of  true 
thought.  To  the  popular  mind  it  is  the  most  necessary 
thought:  therefore,  for  homiletic  use,  it  is  the  most 
powerful  thought.  Jeremy  Taylor  defends  the  simpli- 
city of  the  materials  and  the  structure  of  his  sermons 
by  saying  that  he  cares  little  if  any  witty  censurer 
shall  say  that  he  has  learned  from  them  nothing  but 
that  which  he  knew  before  ;  "  for  no  man  ought  to  be 
offended  that  sermons  are  not  curious  inquiries  after 
new  nothings,  but  pursuances  of  old  truths."  But 
«[eremy  Taylor,  in  his  expositions  as  in  other  things, 
was  "golden-mouthed."  He  threw  a  gorgeous  wealth 
of  illustration  around  his  "old  truths"  and  simple 
plans  of  thought.  Says  an  English  critic,  "We  may 
compare  one  of  his  discourses  to  such  a  country  church 
as  we  sometimes  see  in  these  days,  where  some  loving 
hand  has  covered  the  simple  work  of  village  masons 
with  carvings,  and  filled  the  old  windows  with  prophets 
pictured  on  the  panes." 

Old  biblical  truths  can  be  handled  in  this  mannei 
without  conceits  and  without  straining ;  and,  thus  han- 
dled, they  are  the  elementary  forces  of  the  pulpit.  A 
preacher  needs  to  believe  this.  Trust  the  common 
Btock  of  biblical  thought,  and  use  it  courageously. 
That  very  courage  lifts  a  preacher's  mind  to  a  loftier 
ievel  of  working.  Faithful  manipulation  of  such  mate- 
rials is  the  thing  needed.     Do  not  use  them,  in  the 


I 


oKCT.  XTV.]      THE  EXPLANATION:    QUALITIES.  193 

bulk,  at  second-hand.  ,  Work  them  over.  Reconstruct 
them.  Polish  them.  ^,  Put  them  through  the  laboratory 
of  your  own  thinking.  Get  fresh  robes  for  them  from 
your  own  emotions.  Do  something,  or  the  other  thing, 
or  all  things,  which  shall  make  them  your  own.  Quicken 
thus  your  own  interest  in  them  ;  and  the  result  will  be, 
that,  when  they  go  from  you,  they  will  uplift  hearers 
to  the  heavens. 

In  illustration  of  the  principle  here  involved,  let  me 
cite  a  criticism  by  William  Taylor,  a  contemporary  of 
Walter  Scott.  Southey's  "  Madoc  "  and  Scott's  "  Lay 
of  the  Last  Minstrel  "  were  rivals  for  the  popular  favor. 
In  about  one  year  after  their  publication  Scott  had 
received  above  a  thousand  pounds  for  the  "  Lay,*'  and 
Southey  had  received,  as  he  says,  "just  three  pounds, 
seventeen  shillings,  and  a  penny."  William  Taylor, 
commenting  on  the  contrast,  writes  as  follows:  "Sir 
Walter's  great  success  surprises  me.  Yet  he  has  this 
of  prudence,  that,  far  from  scorning  the  ordinary,  he 
dwells  on  our  manners,  our  opinions,  our  history,  our 
most  familiar  preconceptions.  Goldsmith,  the  most  pop- 
ular of  recent  poets,  is  remarkable  for  saying  well  what 
was  most  obvious  to  say.  Tasso  is  another  dealer  in 
finished  commonplace,  stolen,  everybody  knows  where. 
The  far-fetched  is  not  ware  for  the  numerous  class  oi  \j  ^ 
readers."  This  is  a  gem  of  criticism.  The  principle  ^  7  * 
here  advanced  runs  through  all  popular  literature.  The  Vc^'y/;^ 
success  of  expository  preaching  depends  largely  upon  it*        ^/\ 

10th,  The  explanation  should  be   free  from  certain       (    (y 
scholastic  weaknesses.     In  no  other  part  of  a  sermon 
is  a  preacher  tempted  more  insidiously  to  unconscious 
scholasticism  than  in  this. 

(1)  We  should  especially  avoid  the  needless  use  oi  i   f  / 
the  technical  terms  of  philologv.    An  exDOsition  must         ' 


(94  THE  THIGORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xiv 

often  be  more  learned  than  it  should  seem  to  be.  Nevei 
import  into  a  sermon  the  paraphernalia  of  a  critical 
commentary.  A  double  reason  enforces  this  caution. 
Such  technicalities  are  not  intelligible  to  the  people  \ 
and,  if  they  were,  they  are  not  suited  to  oral  address. 

(2)  On  the  same  principle,  we  should  avoid  need- 
less allusions  to  the  authority  of  manuscripts,  ancient 
versions,  various  readings,  and  the  original  of  the  Eng- 
lish text.  The  ancient  conceit  of  English  preachers  in 
sprinkling  their  discourses  with  quotations  from  Greek 
and  Latin  classics  was  not,  in  their  circumstances,  so 
grave  an  error  as  the  subjection  of  the  Scriptures  to 
scholastic  associations  in  the  minds  of  the  people  would 
be  now.  Yet  that  classicism  of  the  English  pulpit  well- 
nigh  ruined  one  entire  age  of  that  which  was  otherwise 
magnificent  preaching.  To  test  the  principle  one  asks, 
"  May  we  ever  quote  a  word  or  phrase  from  the  origi- 
nal Greek  or  Hebrew  ?  "  I  answer,  circumlocution  to 
avoid  a  foreign  language  in  popular  oral  speech  is 
always  in  good  taste.  Say,  therefore,  "  The  word  in  the 
original  which  is  translated  thus,"  or,  "  The  more  exact 
translation  here  would  be,"  etc. 

(3)  The  principle  involved  in  this  rule  should  lead 
us,  also,  to  avoid  a  pedantic  citation  of  unfamiliar  com- 
mentaries. Possibly  a  blatant  caviler  here  and  there 
might  be  overawed  by  the  names  of  half  a  score  of 
mediaeval  exegetes  of  whom  he  had  never  heard.  But 
Dean  Swift's  advice  to  a  young  clergyman  is  more 
pertinent,  when  he  urges  him  not  to  "perplex  a  whole 
audience  of  sensible  people  for  the  sake  of  three  or  four 
fools  who  are  past  grace." 

(4)  Yet  this  same  principle  should  lead  us  to  avoid 
the  affectation  of  independence  of  scholastic  authority. 
Never  give  a  thrust  at  the  principle   of  authority  in 


LBOT.  XIV.]       THE  EXPLANATION :    QUALITIES.  195 

the  attempt  tc  vindicate,  or  to  exercise  the  right  of 
private  judgment.  You  have,  perhaps,  an  original  in- 
terpretation of  a  text :  commentaries  do  not  support 
you.  Very  well.  Exercise  your  right;  but  why  braj^ 
about  it?  Exercise  it  modestly:  let  alone  the  slaugh- 
tered commentators.  Speak  your  own  mind  without 
disturbing  theirs.  It  may  be  that  you  are  right ;  but 
the  probabilities  are  five  to  one  that  your  hearers  will 
not  believe  that  you  are,  if  you  fling  your  opinion  in 
the  face  of  half  a  dozen  venerable  teachers  who  were 
venerable  before  you  were  born.  Treat  it  as  a  misfor- 
tune if  you  must  part  company  with  other  learned 
men. 

The  popular  mind  feels  by  instinct  a  more  profound 
respect  for  scholarly  authority  than  we  often  give  it 
credit  for.  Underneath  the  current  of  democratic 
scorn  of  books  and  bookish  men,  there  is  an  innate 
reverence  for  the  thing  which  is  thus  depreciated. 
Another  element,  also,  you  will  discover  in  the  popu- 
lar instinct  on  this  subject ;  that  is,  a  sense  of  a  preach- 
er's professional  infidelity  in  such  flings  at  scholastic 
tribunals.  It  is  human  nature  to  respect  a  man  who 
respects  his  own  order.  It  is  natural  that  educated 
mind  should  stand  by  educated  mind;  that  culture 
should  respect  culture ;  that  cultivated  taste  should 
respond  to  cultivated  taste ;  that  scholarly  opinion 
should  defer  to  scholarly  opinion.  The  thinking  com- 
mon people,  who  know  enough  to  know  what  o.daea 
tion  is,  feel  this  profoundly. 

This  popular  instinct  prompts  respect  for  clerical 
fidelity  to  commentators.  Illiterate  men,  when  they 
are  men  of  sense,  like  to  know  that  there  aie  libraries, 
and  universities,  and  historic  monuments  cf  learning, 
and  magnificent  traditions  of  ancient  wisdom,  and  mys* 


196         THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.     [i-bct.  x.» 

terious  insignia  of  intellectual  authority,  back  of  the 
pulpit.  They  do  not  care  to  see  the  libraries  and  the 
monuments ;  but  they  are  glad  to  know  that  they  are 
there,  and  that  their  religious  teachers  know  all  about 
them,  and  respect  them.  A  parishioner  who  is  a  man 
of  good  sense  receives  a  silent  accession  of  respect  for 
his  pastor,  and  for  every  sermon  that  he  preaches,  from 
merely  entering  that  pastor's  study,  and  glancing  at  a 
large  and  well-used  library.  The  very  sight  of  books 
is  an  impressive  spectacle  to  an  uneducated  man  of 
sense.  The  man  must  be  far  down  towards  barbarism 
who  does  not  take  off  his  hat  amidst  such  surround- 
ings. 

An  educated  preacher,  therefore,  who  respects  him- 
self, is  the  representative  of  all  the  libraries  to  his  peo- 
ple. The  wisdom  of  all  the  ages  is  tributary  to  his 
sermons.  No  other  man  can  be  master  of  the  situation 
as  he  can  be,  if  he  appreciates  the  situation,  and  respects 
his  opportunity.  He  unites  in  himself  the  authority  of 
his  teachers  and  the  sympathy  of  his  hearers.  He  is  on 
the  middle  ground  between  the  heights  of  the  univer- 
sity and  the  popular  lowlands ;  he  blends  the(principle 
of  authority  with  the  principle  of  sympathy ;;  and  that 
is  a  union  of  forces  which  no  other  combination  of 
moral  powers  can  equal. 

llthj^^^D-  expla-iia'tion  should,  if  possible,  be  in  keep- 
ing with  the  rhetorical  structure  of  the  text.  "This 
corruptible  must  put  on  incorruption,  and  this  mortal 
must  put  on  immortality;" — what  kind  of  an  exposi- 
tion, rhetorically  considered,  does  this  text  invite  ?  A 
preacher  once  introduced  a  sermon  upon  it  by  observing 
that  the  word  "  mortal "  is  from  the  Latin  word  mors, 
"  death,"  and  therefore  means  "  deathly ; "  "  immortal " 
is  from  the  Latin  words  mors,  and  in,  which  means  "not," 


CBCT.  xiv.J       THE  EXPLANATION :    QUALITIES.  197 

and  therefore  the  entire  word  means  "  not  deathly."  Is 
the  philological  dissection  of  such  a  text  in  sympathy 
with  it  ?  Does  it  prolong  and  sustain  the  impression 
which  the  text  itself  creates  ?  Another  preacher,  com- 
menting on  the  text,  "Now  we  see  through  a  glass, 
darkly,  but  then  face  to  face,"  pounced  upon  the  word 
"  glass "  as  containing  the  most  transpai'ent  idea  he 
could  find  in  the  text ;  and  in  his  vitreous  exposition 
he  contrived  to  find  a  place  for  the  fact  that  glass  was 
first  used  for  windows  in  the  third  century  of  the 
Christian  era,  and  stained  glass,  for  ecclesiastical  win- 
dows, in  the  seventh  century. 

The  question  is.  Has  not  rhetorical  congruity  some- 
thing to  say  respecting  such  expositions  as  these  ?  The 
principle  is  an  obvious  one,  that  a  certain  rhetorical 
jympathy__ought  to  blend  a  subject  of  thought  with 
thought  on  that  subject.  The  same  principle  should,  if 
possible,  blend  a  text  and  its  explanation.  An  expo- 
sition should,  if  possible,  be  rhetorically  a  prolongation 
of  the  text;  it  should  make  the  same  impression j  it 
should  be  on  the  same  level  of  thought  and  feeling. 
Sustain,  if  possible,  the  key-note  of  inspiration. 

"  If  possible,"  I  say :  sometimes  it  is  not  possible. 
Three  exceptions  deserve  mention.  One  is  when  a 
text  demands  only  a  verbal  exposition.  The  definition 
of  a  few  words  may  be  all  that  it  needs  to  put  its  mean- 
ing fully  before  the  hearer.  There  is  no  place  for  a 
rhetorical  expansion  of  it  in  the  explanation.  Another 
exception  occurs  when  the  use  to  be  made  of  the  text 
in  the  'body  of  the  sermon  does  not  demand  the  aid  of 
the  text.  The  body  of  the  sermon  may  be  an  independ- 
ent discussion.  X^ie  text  may  be  a  motto  only.  Hav- 
ing introduced  the  subject,  the  sooner  the  text  retires 
from  the  discussion,  the  better.      A  third  exception    y/ 


~t 


198  THE  THEORY  OE  PEEACinNG.         [lect.  xnr. 

Dccni>-,  frhen  to  sustain  the  rhetorical  impression  of 
B  texi  would  neutralize,  in  whole  or  in  part,  the 
design  of  the  sermon.  This  may  be  the  case,  as  we 
have  seen,  in  the  treatment  of  "promising  texts." 
An  imaginative  text  may  contain  a  principle  which 
yo'i  may  wish  to  treat  argumentatively.  The  Psalms 
are  lyric  poems:  yet  they  contain  themes  of  sermons 
which  we  do  not  wish  to  sing.  The  beginning  of  the 
fifty-fifth  chapter  of  Isaiah  is  an  exhortation,  "Ho, 
every  one  that  thirsteth."  But,  in  a  discourse  upon 
it,  you  may  wish  to  elaborate  the  doctrine  of  an 
unlimited  Atonement.  In  such  cases  your  object  re- 
quires that  you  should  not  prolong  the  rhetorical  im- 
pression of  the  text.  These  exceptions,  however,  leave 
a  large  range  for  the  principle,  that,  if  possible,  the 
explanation  should  be  so  conducted  as  to  be  in  keeping 
with  the  rhetorical  character  of  the  text. 

12th,  An  explanation-ahQuld_be  so  conducted  as  not 
to  excitelHvolity  in  an  audience.  Bishop  Andrews,  of 
the  time  of  King  James  I.  of  England,  took  for  the 
text  of  a  Christmas  sermon  before  the  king  the  words, 
"  That  in  the  dispensation  of  the  fullness  of  times  he 
might  gather  together  in  one  all  things  in  Christ."  Ir 
his  exposition  occurs  the  following :  "  Seeing  the  text 
is  of  seasons,  it  would  not  be  out  of  season  itself; 
and,  though  it  be  never  out  of  season  to  speak  of 
Chiist,  yet  even  Christ  hath  his  seasons.  *  Your  time 
i&  always,'  saith  he ;  '  but  so  is  not  mine.  I  have  my 
seasons,'  one  of  which  seasons  is  this,  the  season  of 
his  birth,  whereby  all  recapitulate  in  heaven  and  earth, 
which  is  the  season  of  the  text.  So  this  is  a  text  of 
the  seasons."  Perhaps  you  can  make  sense  of  this :  I 
can  not.  One  of  the  most  useless  nodes  of  preaching 
is  that  which  depends  for  the  interest  it  excites  upon 


LBC?!.  XIV.]      THE  EXI»LAKATI0N:   QtTALlirES.  199 

the  risible  sensibilities ;  and  the  most  offensive  special 
of  this  genus  of  sermons  is  that  which  degrades  the 
Bible  to  the  antics  of  rhetorical  buffoonery.  Three 
radical  errors  are  involved  in  such  preaching. 

One  is  that  it  almost  invariably  does  violence  to  the    /  m 
biblical  idea  of  the  language  used.     That  is  rarely  a 
truthful  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  which  excites 
laughter.     Moreover,  the  kind  of  interest  which  bibli-  f  ^   \ 
cal  fun  creates  is  hostile  to  the  main  end  of  preaching.  ' 

Spiritual  success  in  preaching  depends  quite  as  much 
on  the  kind  as  on  the  degree  of  the  interest  it  awakens. 
The  interest  of  mirth  at  the  best,  and  in  its  legitimate 
uses,  can  perform  only  what  may  be  called  a  menial        -^- 
service,  so  inferior  is  it  relatively  to  the   more   noble    /  L    . 
workings  of  the  pulpit.     The  instant  that  it  gets  above   /  \ 
that  menial  rank,  it  becomes  an  encumbrance  and  ar 
offense.     A  preacher  who  depends  upon  it  as  the  charrt 
of  his  pulpit  has  his  own  work  to  uiido  when  he  would 
reach  the  conscience  of  his  people.  >  He  is  like  an  un-   » 
skillful  oarsman,  who  retards  his  own   speed  by  con-  (  w/|^ 
stant  back-water,  for  the  entertainment  of  making  the 
spray  dance  in  the  sunbeams.  ^ 

Moreover,  the  interest  of  mirth  directly  associated  ^ 
with  biblical  texts  is  especially  hazardous  to  the  popu- 
lar reverence  for  the  Scriptures.  We  may  admit,  that 
in  one  or  two  instances,  like  the  narrative  of  Elijah's 
mockery  of  the  priests  of  Baal,  there  are  biblical  texts, 
which  with  vivid  painting,  and  from  the  lips  of  a  good 
mimic,  might  excite  the  mirth  of  an  audience  with  no 
violence  to  the  inspired  thought ;  but  the  admission  is 
no  acknowledgment  of  the  expediency  or  the  right  to 
bring  other  passages  into  mirthful  associations.  Texts 
are  injured  by  such  uses.  The  interest  of  conviction, 
of  reverence,  of  penitence,  of  love,  ought  never  to  b€ 
hazarded  for  the  sake  of  the  interest  of  mirth. 


200  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xr» 

13th,  An  explanation  should  be  such  as  to  suggest  a 
definite  theory  of  inspiration.  Homiletic  exposition 
always  involves  some  theory  of  inspiration.  We  car 
not,  if  we  would,  discuss  the  Bible  as  if  the  question 
of  its  inspiration  were  obsolete.  Homiletic  exposition 
must  often  disclose  a  preacher's  theory  of  inspiration. 
If  you  do  not  define  it  in  form,  you  must  often  express 
it  by  implication.  When  you  do  not  express  it,  you 
will  often  hint  at  it.  When  you  do  not  consciously 
hint  at  it,  it  will  look  out  of  the  windows  of  your  ser- 
mon, and  show  itself  for  what  it  is. 

It  is  important  to  observe,  therefore,  that  no  indefi- 
nite theory  of  inspiration  can  live  in  the  popular  faith  .j 
The  fact  is  a  most  significant  one,  that  the  popular 
mind  never,  to  any  considerable  extent,  enters  into 
refined  distinctions  on  this  doctrine.  It  receives  the 
doctrine  in  some  strongly  defined  form,  or  in  no  form. 
Vagueness  of  teaching  destroys  the  doctrine  as  effectu- 
ally as  flat  denial.  Exposition  must  assume  it  in  a  bold 
form.  Undeveloped  hints  of  it  must  suggest  it  in  such 
form.  If  we  claim  that  one  text  is  authoritative,  and 
another  not,  we  must  have  a  reason  to  give  which  will 
not  seem  to  the  common  sense  of  hearers  to  fritter 
away  from  inspiration  every  thing  that  is  clear,  and 
every  thing  that  is  decisive. 

Yet  the  pulpit  may  suggest  ill-defined  ideas  of  inspi- 
ration by  expositions  which  are  regardless  of  varieties 
of  biblical  style.  You  can  not  make  biblical  poetry 
dogmatic,  or  biblical  argument  imaginative,  or  biblical 
dogma  figurative,  or  biblical  history  allegorical,  or  bib- 
lical allegory  biographical,  without  teaching,  by  impli- 
cation, ideas  of  inspiration  which  no  man  can  so  define 
as  to  save  them  from  self-contradiction,  and  yet  leave 
string  points  to  the  popular  faith  in  those  ideas.     To 


LKcrr.  xnr.]       THE  EXPLANATION :    QUALITIES.  201 

the  popular  mind  such  interpretations  will  seem  to 
make  the  Scriptures  contradict  all  the  laws  by  which 
thought  expresses  itself  when  uninspired. 

14th,  An  explanation  should  be  such  as  to  suggest 
naturally  the  proposition  of  the  sermon.  Dr.  Ross,  a 
professor  of  theology  in  Glasgow  in  the  seventeenth 
century,  published  a  sermon  on  the  text,  "Almost  thou 
persuadest  me  to  be  a  Christian."  He  states  his  propo- 
sition as  fourfold :  1.  To  describe  the  different  parties 
which  distract  our  divided  Zion ;  2.  To  show  the  ma- 
lignancy of  the  sin  of  schism ;  3.  To  show  the  neces- 
sity of  Episcopacy  for  the  support  of  the  concerns  of 
Christianity;  4.  To  apply  the  subject.  "The  subject" 
here  seems  vast  enough ;  but  how  shall  the  gulf  between 
it  and  the  text  be  bridged?  Prefatory  remarks  may 
introduce  such  a  proposition ;  they  may  introduce  any 
thing.  But  how,  ,frpm  the,  point  of  the  text,  shall  we 
discover  the  proposition?  The  firmament  to  be  ex- 
plored by  our  homiletic  telescope  is  immense. 

Yet  does  not  this  extreme  case  illustrate  a  defect 
of  which,  in  less  degree,  we  are  often  sensible  in  listen- 
ing to  sermons,  —  that  the  gulf  between  the  text  and 
the  proposition  is  not  bridged  in  any  natural  and  effec-  ^^^^ 
tive  way  ?  :  The  text  is  explained,  the  subject  is  intro-^w 
duced;  but  neither  is  linked  to  the  other.  With  the  |  < 
text  in  mind  we  listen  to  the  proposition  with  surprise : 
with  the  proposition  in  mind  we  recall  the  text  with 
surprise.  Observe,  then,  that  a  good  explanation  will 
often  show  that  the  proposition  is  contained  in  the  text. 
If  not  this,  it  will  often  show  that  the  proposition  is 
naturally  suggested  by  the  text.  The  pertinency  of  an 
accommodated  text  depends  wholly  upon  the  explana- 
tory transition  from  text  to  theme.  No  matter  how 
brief  the  transition ;  if  it  be  such  as  to  build  a  natural 


£02  tHE  tHEORY  Oir  PREACHIl^G.  [lbct.  xi? 

bridge  between  text  and  theme,  it  is  enough.  A  good 
explanation  will  often  give  to  a  subject  the  inspired 
authority  of  the  text.  This  we  observed  as  one  of  the 
uses  of  a  text.  The  value  of  it  often  depends  wholly 
on  the  exposition  of  the  text.  If  it  be  so  explained 
that  it  evidently  indorses  the  subject,  inspiration  be- 
comes responsible  for  the  subject.  The  proposition 
nr.ay  then  be  discussed  as  if  it  were  itself  inspired. 
This  is  the  chief  defense  of  topical  sermons. 

15th,  In  a  topical  sermon  the  explanation  should,  if 
possible,  be  such  as  to  bring  the  text  to  bear  directly 
upon  the  conclusion.  It  is  often  of  great  value  to  be 
able  to  use  a  text  in  the  application  of  a  sermon.  To 
repeat  it,  to  urge  it  home  as  containing  the  germ  of  all 
that  has  been  said,  even  to  show  that  text  and  sermon 
are  in  the  same  line  of  thought,  and  the  application  of 
one  is  therefore  supported  by  the  other,  —  this  is  often 
of  great  force  in  the  conclusion.  Occasionally  the  text 
forms  the  best  possible  closing  sentence  of  a  sermon. 
"  Choose  you  this  day  whom  ye  will  serve  "  may  be 
the  most  forcible  beginning  and  ending  of  a  sermon 
on  immediate  repentance. 

But  I  have  said  that  this  adjustment  of  explanation 
to  conclusion  is  valuable  when  it  is  possible.  Sgme- 
times  it  is  not  possible ;  that  is,  it  is  not  natural.  !  The 
application  of  a  discourse  may  flow  more  naturally 
from  the  body  of  the  discussion  than  directly  from  the 
text.  )■  The  applications  may  be  divergent,  not  concen- 
trated in  one  textual  thought.  ^  A  closing  appeal  may 
grow  out  of  the  last  division  of  a  sermon,  and  may  be 
too  lemotely  connected  with  the  text  to  invite  textual 
aid  in  its  development.  The  expedient  in  question  can 
not  be  forced.  It  must  be  the  natural  outgoing  of  the 
text  as  unfolded  in  the  explanation,  or  it  will  fall  flat. 


LIECT.  XIV.]       THE  EXPLANATION :    LOCALITY.  20{: 

16th,  The  explanation^houLLJbe  varied  on  different — , 
occasions.  A  very  obvious  hint  is  this  when  attention 
is  called  to  it ;  but  often  attention  is  not  given  to  it. 
Have  no^stereotjped  method  of  exposition.  Do  not 
always^philQlogize  by  verbal  criticism.  Do  not  always 
explain  descriptively.  Do  not  always  tell  of  the  authoi 
of  the  text,  his  character,  his  condition,  his  history. 
Do  not  always  speak  of  his  readers,  who  and  what  they 
were,  and  why  he  wrote  to  them.  Do  not  always  cite 
parallel  passages,  nor  always  paraphrase,  nor  always  pass 
rhetorical  criticism  on  the  beauty,  the  force,  the  logic,  of 
the  text.  No  one  of  these  varieties  can  be  always  be- 
coming :  no  two,  no  three  of  them  can  generally  be  so. 
(We  must  have  variety,  if  we  have  fitness :  ^hen  we  gain 
a  virtue  in  variety  itself.  Any  thing  will  caricature 
itself  in  the  course  of  time,  if  it  never  varies.  "  Para- 
dise Lost "  would  become  ludicrous,  if  we  should  never 
hear  any  thing  else.  Macbeth  and  Hamlet  would  be- 
come comedies,  if  we  were  doomed  to  hear  them 
rehearsed  once  a  week,  as  people  listen  to  sermons. 
Boys  in  the  street  would  mouth  parodies  of  them  • 
Respect  the  dignity  of  a  preacher  of  the  gospel  enough , 
to  protect  it  from  burlesque  in  your  own  person. 

V.  We  have  now  considered  the  qualities  of  the 
explanation.  Another  general  topic  demands  a  brief 
notice.  It  is  the  localiJ^^^,of  the  explanation  relatively 
to  other  parts  of  a  sermon.  Tftts-will  vary  according  to 
the  character  of  the  sermon.  In  an  expository  sermon 
explanation  forms  the  body  of  the  discourse.  In  a  tex«  ' 
tual  sermon  the  explanation  may  often  be  divided-  i 
Each  clause  of  the  text  being  a  division  of  the  sermon, 
each  may  be  explained  in  the  development  of  its  own 
dinsion.  Not  that  this  will  necessarily  be  so ;  but  often 
it  will  be  the  natural  method  to  introduce  each  part  of 


204  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lkct.  xn 

the  explanation  in  the   place  where  it  is  wanted  foi 
immediate  use. 

In  either  a  topical  or  a  textual  sermon  the  explana 
tion  may  sometimes  form  an  introductory  division  bj 
itself.  This  will  often  be  the  natural  method  of  explain 
ing  a  very  difficult  text,  or  a  text  which  is  commonly 
misinterpreted,  or  a  text  which  is  severely  contested 
Take  the  text,  "I  could  wish  myself  accursed  from 
Christ."  You  wish  to  discourse  from  that  text  on 
the  passion  of  love  for  the  souls  of  men.  This  is  pre- 
cisely what  the  text  expresses.  Yet  to  evolve  it  clearly 
from  the  text  requires  time.  It  can  not  be  well  done  in 
a  brief,  preliminary  fragment  of  a  sermon.  Very  well : 
let  the  first  division  of  the  sermon  propose  to  explam 
the  meaning  of  the  text ;  this  serves  the  double  purpose 
of  giving  time,  and  of  attracting  an  attention  which 
your  exposition  might  not  receive  as  a  preliminary. 
But  in  a  topical  sermon  the  explanation  will,  more 
frequently  than  otherwise,  be  a  preliminary  to  the 
proposition.  If  an  explanation  is  needed  in  a  topical 
discourse,  it  will  generally  be  brief,  and,  as  we  have 
seen,  is  a  bridge  from  text  to  subjecf. 

Which  shall  take  the  precedence,  —  the  explanation, 
or  the  introduction  proper,  when  both  are  needed,  in  a 
topical  sermon  ?  As  we  shall  see,  these  are  two  things. 
Which  precedes  the  other,  —  the  remarks  explanatory 
of  the  text,  or  other  remarks  introductory  of  the  sub- 
ject? I  answer,  N^  rule  is  practicable:  follow  the 
homiletic  instinct.  (Sometimes  this  will  give  the  pre- 
cedence to  one,  sometimes  to  the  other,  and  sometimes 
it  will  intermingle  them.  \The  question  is  one  of  the 
minutiae  of  sermonizing,-^  to  which  criticism  can  give 
no  more  definite  answer  than  this  without  hampering 
homiletic  freedom. 


LECTURE  XV. 

KXCUESUS:    THE    BIBLE    8EBVICB, 

This  discussion  of  the  subject  of  exposition  suggeet* 
ftnotner  topic,  which  does  not  necessarily  belong  to  it 
as  a  subject  of  homiletic  theory,  but  which  excites  con- 
siderable interest  at  present,  and  is  naturally  considered 
now  in  the  form  of  an  excursus.  The  question  is  specifi- 
^.ally  this,  Does  the  biblical  instruction  of  our  churches 
require  any  change  in  the  present  usages  of  the  New 
England  pulpit  in  conducting  the  services  of  the  Lord's 
Oay? 

I.  To  answer  this  question  intelligently,  we  need  to 
note,  first,  some  facts  respecting  the  state  of  things  in 
which  our  present  usages  had  their  origin.  One  is,  that. 
In  the  olden  time,  the  two  sermons  on  the  Lord's  Day, 
with,  the  accompanying  exercises,  constituted  the  whole 
of  the  services  of  public  worship.  Sabbath-schools 
were  not.  The  first  Sabbath-school  in  this  country  is 
not  yet  seventy-five  years  old.  Bible-classes  were  not 
common.  I  am  not  able  to  find  evidence  that  they  ex- 
isted, to  any  general  extent,  before  Sabbath-schools  were 
instituted.  Weekly  lectures  were  not  frequent,  except 
the  single  lecture  preparatory  to  the  administration  ol 
the  Lord's  Supper.  We  are  within  bounds  in  saying, 
that,  as  a  general  rule,  the  services  of  public  worship 
were  limited  to  the  Lord's  Day  and  to  the  two  preach 
ing  services  of  that  day. 

205 


206  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING  [lect. 

Another  fact  bearing  upon  the  question  is  that  bibli- 
cal expositiea  was  not  common,  except  in  th6^  exercises 
{/  of  public  worship.  Nearly  all  the  exposition  of  the 
-^  Scriptures  which  the  people  received  was  from  their 
JiJ-     pastors,  and  was   given   bj  them  from   their  pulpits. 

fThe  formal,  religious  instruction  of  children  at  home 
was  confined  mainly  to  two  things,  —  the  Westminster 
Catechism  and  the  text  of  the  Scriptures,  both  of  which 
were  committed  to  memory.  Aged  persons  are  still 
living  who  give  evidence  of  this  fact  in  their  own  reli- 
gious culture. 

The  second  Sabbath-school  in  Massachusetts  was  es- 
tablished by  my  father,  at  the  suggestion  of  a  Christian 
lady,  in  his  parish  at  West  Brookfield.  It  was  done  in 
opposition  to  the  judgment  of  some  of  his  most  devout 
parishioners.  They  refused  to  countenance  the  innova- 
tion by  the  presence  of  their  children.  And  he  has 
told  me  that  he  and  others  who  favored  it  had  reflected 
so  little  on  the  subject,  that  they  scarcely  knew  what 
to  do  with  the  children  who  did  attend.  At  the  first 
they  could  think  of  nothing  appropriate  to  the  Lord's 
Day,  but  the  committal  to  memory  of  biblical  passages, 
the  Catechism,  and  Watts's  Psalms  and  Hymns. 

That  state  of  things  could  not  well  have  been  differ- 
ent ;  for  there  were  no  popular  commentaries.  Chris- 
tian parents  had  not  the  means  of  interpreting  the 
Scriptures  to  their  households  without  aid  from  the 
pulpit.  "Doddridge's  Family  Expositor,"  published 
about  a  hundred  and  thirty  years  ago,  was  the  first  work 
of  the  kind  in  our  language,  and  was  not  of  great  value 
fcr  the  discussion  of  the  difficulties  of  the  Bible;  nor 
was  the  circulation  of  it  at  all  general.  Books  were 
costly,  and  the  country  poor.  The  best  biblical  com- 
taentaries  were  in  Latin,  and  of  course  accessible  only 


h> 


L«OT.  xv.J       EXCURSUS :    THE  BIB^E  SERVICE.  207 

to  the  clergy.  Rev.  Albert  Barnes  once  told  me,  that, 
when  he  begaji  the  preparation  of  his  "Notes  on  the 
New  Testament,"  the  only  books  he  could  depend  upon 
for  his  assistance  were  his  lexicons,  and  a  copy  of  the 
"  Critici  Sacri," —  a  work  in  thirteen  Latin  folios,  which 
formed  the  best  part  of  his  library.  Yet  that  was  not 
fa"  from  the  year  1830.  I  give  these  details  in  evidence 
of  the  fact,  tnat,  from  the  necessity  of  the  case,  biblical 
exposition  through  all  the  early  periods  of  New  Eng- 
land history  must  have  come  from  the  clergy,  and  must 
have  been  a  part  of  the  work  of  the  pulpit  on  the  Sab- 
bath. 

It  is  in  evidence,  furthermore,  that  the  exposition  of 
the  Scriptures  in  the  early  history  of  our  churches 
was  not  neglected  by  the  pulpit.  The  biblical  learn- 
ing of  the  clergy  was,  of  course,  variable.  But  among  \ 
them  were  at  all  times  to  be  found  excellent  Greek  and 
Hebrew  scholars.  The  proportion  of  those  who  had  a 
working  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  language  was  at  one 
time  probably  larger  than  at  present.  Many  of  the  old 
manuscript  sermons  still  found  in  the  archives  of  our 
libraries  are  replete  with  exposition.  So  far  as  I  am 
able  to  learn,  the  bulk  of  the  ancient  preaching  of  New 
England  was  not  of  a  controversial  or  a  dogmatic  char- 
acter. The  majority  of  those  discourses  were  practical 
discussions  of  Christian  experience,  hortatory  appeals 
to  the  impenitent,  sermons  of  biblical  biography  and 
Incident,  and  'Expositions  knd  textual  discussions. 

Another  fact  points  in  the  same  direction.  The 
usage  was  almost  universal  of  commenting  on  the  pas- 
sage of  the  Scriptures  which  was  read  as  a  preliminary 
to  the  "long  prayer."  Many  of  the  early  churches 
of  New  England  would  not  tolerate  the  reading  of  the 
Bible   in   their  pulpits  without  such   comment.      The 


208  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.  [lbot.  x^ 

rehearsal  of  the  Scriptures  as  the  "  lesson  of  the  day,*^ 
as  practiced  in  the  Church  of  England,  and  which  naa 
now  become  so  common  among  us,  our  fathers  reso- 
lutely discouraged  and  often  denounced.  They  called 
it  "  dumb  reading."  As  they  would  not  "  say  prayers," 
but  would  pray,  so  they  would  not  read  the  Scriptures 
after  a  manner  which  tempted  them  to  indolent  and 
listless  worship.  Whatever  else  they  did,  they  would 
not  mock  God.  That  state  of  feeling  led  to  a  vast 
amount  of  exposition  of  the  Bible  outside  of  sermons. 

II.  It  is  very  obvious  that  time  has  brought  about  a 
silent  revolution  in  the  relations  of  our  pulpit  to  the 
work  of  explaining  the  word  of  God.  The  ancient 
usage  of  the  two  sermons  on  the  Lord's  Day  remains, 
for  the  most  part,  without  innovation;  but  that  is 
nearly  all  that  remains  unchanged. 

Specially  should  it  be  noted  that  biblical  instruction 
has  come  to  be  very  largely  given  by  laymen.  It  has 
become  a  question  for  debate  in  Sabbath-school  con- 
ventions, what  duty  and  what  privilege,  if  any,  belong 
to  the  clergy  in  the  working  of  the  whole  machinery 
of  biblical  teaching  to  the  youth  of  their  parishes.  The 
practical  connection  of  the  pastor  with  the  school  is 
in  the  majority  of  cases  nominal.  Again :  popular  com- 
mentaries have  greatly  diminished  the  dependence  of 
adult  hearers  upon  the  pulpit  for  their  scriptural  knowl- 
edge. It  has  become  a  much  more  laborious  effort 
than  it  once  was  to  preach  expository  discourses  which 
will  find  listening  ears.  Exposition,  if  not  more  learned, 
must  be  more  versatile  and  more  spirited. 

As  a  natural  consequence  of  this  state  of  things,  ex- 
position in  our  pulpits  has  suffered  a  very  general  and 
exhaustive  decline.  Coleridge  pronounced  it  one  of 
the  silent  revolutions  by  which  learning  had  suffered 


LKCT.  XV.]        EXCURSUS .    THE  BIBLE  SERVICE.  205 

in  England,  that  literature  had  to  so  large  an  extent 
"  fallen  off  from  the  liberal  professions."  By  a  similar 
revolution,  scriptural  exposition  has  silently  fallen  o5 
from  the  pulpit.  Comparatively  few  expository  ser- 
mons are  preached.  In  some  congregations  they  would 
subjfxjt  a  preacher's  zeal  to  adverse  criticism.  Even 
textaal  sermons  are  not  nearly  so  abundant  as  they 
were  a  century  ago.  The  habit  of  comment  on  the  pas- 
sages of  the  Bible  read  for  devotional  uses  has  almost 
entirely  ceased.  (  Popular  taste  and  clerical  compliance 
have  sacrificed  this  ancient  and  invaluable  usage  to  the 
demand  for  brevity  in  public  worship. 

Meanwhile,  what  of  the  ancient  double  service  of  the 
pulpit  on  the  Sabbath?  It  surely  is  not  holding  ouj 
audiences  with  sufl&cient  force  to  prevent  their  question 
ing  its  usefulness.  One  of  the  modern  "  signs,"  as  you 
very  well  know,  indicative  of  the  relations  subsisting 
between  the  pulpit  and  the  pew,  is  the  query  whether 
one  service  for  preaching  purposes  is  not  better  than 
two.  However  the  question  may  be  answered,  it  is  a 
very  pregnant  matter  to  the  pulpit  that  the  question 
should  ever  have  been  asked.  It  indicates  a  flagging 
of  Christian  interest  in  the  work  of  the  pulpit  as  now 
conducted.  Why  is  not  the  query  raised,  whether 
some  other  labor  of  the  day  is  a  necessity  ?  Why  do 
not  thoughtful  laymen  ask  whether  the  Sabbath-school 
should  be  suspended,  or  the  evening  conference  meet 
ing? 

The  people  are  sensible  of  monotony  in  the  two 
sermons  of  the  day,  as  they  are  not.  in  attendance  upon 
any  other  services  of  a  crowded  Sunday.  By  parting 
with  expository  preaching,  the  pulpit  has  parted  with 
its  most  important  aid  and  stimulus  to  variety.  No 
other  one  thing  gives  to  preaching  so  wide  a  range  dJ 


210  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lwct.  xv 

religions  thought  as  the  exposition  of  the  ScriptureslN 
(Vhen  it  comes  forth  as  the  fruit  of  a  rich,  full  mind,  — 
rich  in  scholarly  resources,  and  full  of  intense  practical 
aims. 

This,  in  my  view,  explains  why  thinking  and  ovei^ 
tasked  laymen  are  asking  how  the  Lord's  Day  can  be 
made  less  laborious.  The  two  sermons,  with  theit 
devotional  accompaniments,  are  the  only  two  things  iu 
the  occupations  of  the  day  in  which,  as  now  generally 
conducted,  the  sense  of  monotony  is  unavoidable.  The 
second  sermon  is  often  a  treadmill  in  its  impression  of 
sameness.  There  is  no  evidence  that  the  popular  in- 
terest in  preaching  as  such  has  declined.  The  largest 
regular  audiences  in  the  land  are  in  churches.  No  such 
audiences  could  be  assembled  weekly  anywhere  else. 
But  Sabbath  engagements  have  multiplied,  and  other 
stimuli  to  religious  thought  have  crowded  within  the 
popular  reach,  so  that,  to  sustain  the  preaching  at  its 
established  height  of  interest,  a  new  inspiration  of 
variety  is  indispensable.  Under  the  circumstances,  it  is 
the  most  natural  thing  that  church-going  people  should 
seek  relief  from  overtasking  by  proposing  to  drop  one 
of  the  only  two  services  which  appear  to  them  to  be 
substantially  alike.  We  can  not  blame  them  for  not 
being  reverently  fond  of  treadmills. 

III.  We  may  then  safely  answer  the  main  question, 
80  far  at  least  as  to  say,  that,  in  some  form  or  other, 
we  need  to  reinstate  the  biblical  instruction  of  our 
churches  and  our  youth  in  the  pulpit,  and  in  the  hands 
of  pastors.  This,  it  seems  to  me,  is  the  vital  point  to 
be  carried.  The  fatal  evil  is  that  preaching  should  be 
isolated  from  the  work  of  scriptural  teaching.  No 
preacher  can  afford  to  allow  that  work  to  fall  off  from 
his  pulpit.     An  orator  in  the  pulpit  is  a  great  man ;  but 


LBCT.  XV.]        EXCURSUS :    THE  BIBLE  SERVICE  211 

no  man  is  so  great  that  he  can  afford  to  be  nothing  else 
than  a  pulpit  orator.  The  evil  thrusts  with  two  edgea 
It  cuts  down  the  worth  of  the  preaching,  and  it  cuts 
down  the  worth  of  teaching  as  well. 

On  this  last  point,  both  pastors  and  laymen  ofte» 
need  to  be  wiser  than  they  are.  Nothing  in  the  Chris- 
tian training  of  a  people  works  as  well  as  it  might 
work,  if  it  is  not  headed  by  the  pulpit.  Men  talk  more. 
gliblyjhan  wisely  of  the  super ioritj-of^  laymen  and  of 
women_jii„_Christian  work.  The  notion  that  on  any 
large  scale,  and  for  long  periods  of  time,  we  can  put 
religious  work  under  the  leadership  of  either  men  or 
women  who  are  doing  any  thing  else  than  religious 
work  is  not  philosophical.  Nothing  else  of  the  kind 
in  this  world  prospers  under  leadership  which  is  not 
concentrated  upon  it,  and  concentrated  in  the  hands  of 
men.  Yet  the  man  who  devotes  his  life  to  the  far-reach- 
ing study  and  conduct  of  Christian  labor  becomes  de 
facto  a  clergyman.  Call  him  what  you  will,  dress  him 
as  you  please,  put  him  where  you  choose,  he  is  practi- 
cally a  minister  of  the  gospel.  Licensed  or  unlicensed, 
"  in  orders,"  or  without  orders,  or  in  disorder,  he  is,  to 
the  people  among  whom  he  works,  a  man  set  apart  from 
themselves.  He  is  not  doing  their  work,  nor  living 
their  life.  He  is  not  "  one  of  them  "  in  any  vital  sense 
of  the  phrase.  He  is  a  professional  worker  for  Christ 
as  truly  as  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 

We  must  not  be  misled  by  names  in  a  matter  of  this 
sorb;  and  let  us  not  succumb  to  a  senseless  prejudice 
against  a  clerical  exterior.  Of  some  things,  we  must 
have  the  form,  if  we  have  the  thing.  If  the  leadership 
of  Christian  work  creates  for  itself  the  equivalent  of 
ministers,  the  fact  only  indicates  that  the  leadership 
naturally  belongs   to    ministers,   as    theoretically  we 


212  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.  [user,  x.9 

should  suppose  it  would  belong  to  them.  If  we  do  not 
create  the  men  for  the  work,  they  will  be  created  h^ 
the  work.  The  work  suffers,  if  it  is  deprived  of  such 
leadership.  Decapitate  the  clergy  to-day,  and  Chris- 
tian work  has  only  to  give  itself  for  a  generation  to 
creating  another  set  of  men  to  take  their  places.  Thia 
principle,  then,  it  is  reasonable  to  apply  to  the  work  oi 
biblical  instruction.  We  must  believe  that  you  can  not 
have  that  form  of  Christian  labor  in  its  best  develop- 
ment, if  usages  are  so  framed  as  to  exclude  the  minis- 
try from  the  doing  of  it.  They  must  lead  it  by  actual 
participation  in  it,  or  it  must  degenerate  in  quality, 
whatever  it  may  be  in  quantity. 

If  these  views  are  correct,  it  follows  that  one  of  the 
most  vital  changes  which  our  present  system  of  Chris- 
tian work  needs  is  to  reinstate  in  the  pulpit  the  work 
of  biblical  teaching ;  not  at  all  to  diminish  that  work 
elsewhere ;  not  at  all  to  hamper  its  freedom  anywhere ; 
but  to  restore  the  leadership  in  it  to  the  pulpit.  I  say 
"  restore,"  because  the  pulpit  once  had  that  leadership ; 
for  it  had  the  whole  of  the  work.  It  did  all  that  was 
done.  It  is  no  innovation  to  devise  methods  of  setting 
the  pulpit  again  at  the  head  of  all  expedients,  and  of  all 
training  for  the  scriptural  education  of  the  people.  It 
is  strictly  a  restoration  of  a  prerogative  which  has  be- 
come partially,  and  in  many  cases  wholly,  obsolete.  It 
is  a  restoration  which  I  believe  nine-tenths,  if  not  even 
a  larger  proportion,  of  our  thinking  laymen  would 
gladly  welcome. 

Depend  upon  it  that  you  have  a  just  and  a  generous 
constituency  to  deal  with  in  this  thing.  In  no  develop- 
ment of  working  power  in  real  life  are  the  true  aristo% 
soonei  found  out  and  appreciated  and  obeyed  than  in 
our  complicated  system  of  labor  for  the  religious  cul 


LBOT.  XV.]        EXCURSUS :    THE  BIBLE  SERVICE.  21 S 

ture  of  the  people.  Workers  of  every  grade  find  their 
honest  level  here  by  a  gravitation  more  unerring  than 
that  of  a  plumb-line.  The  planets  are  not  truer  to 
their  orbits.  If,  among  any  people  of  average  intelli- 
gence and  good  sense  and  piety,  you  do  not  find  your 
place  of  moral  supremacy,  where  you  shine  as  the  stars, 
it  will  be  because  you  lack  something  which  belongs  to 
the  luster  of  that  supremacy.  There  is  a  vacuum  or  a 
soft  spot  in  you  somewhere.  Scholarship,  tact,  indus- 
try, innate  force,  or  tlie  graces  of  the  divine  in-dwelling, 
something  or  other,  which,  by  the  nature  of  things, 
lies  in  the  ground-work  of  success,  is  always  wanting 
when  a  biblical  preacher  fails  to  grasp  and  to  hold  the 
moral  leadership  of  all  the  agencies  at  work  among  aL 
honest  and  sensible  people  for  their  Christian  building 
and  adornment. 

IV.  But  how  shall  this  re-instatement  of  biblicav 
teaching  in  our  pulpits  be  achieved  ?  I  answer,  in  view 
of  what  has  been  said,  that  some  modification  seems  to 
be  demanded  in  one  of  the  two  preaching  services  ct 
the  Sabbath  as  now  sustained  in  our  churches.  Recon- 
struct one  of  these  two  services  in  such  a  way  as  sEall 
l)nng  the  pulpit  more  obviously  to  the  front  in  the 
work  of  biblical  instruction.  The  question  of  expedi- 
ency as  affected  by  locality,  by  the  public  opinion  of  a 
church,  by  the  character  of  a  community,  must,  o.^ 
course,  be  decided  by  the  good  sense  of  a  pastor  in  ea  2I' 
«ase  as  it  arises. 

The  substitution  of  the  Sabbath-school  for  the  usual 
service  of  the  afternoon  is  often,  but  by  no  means 
always,  the  best  thing  that  is  practicable.  Yet  this 
should  never  be  done,  unless  it  can  be  so  arranged  as 
to  make  the  pastor  active  in  the  biblical  work  of  the 
Bchool.     Whether  he  should  be  superintendent,  or  not 


214  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xt 

is  a  minor  matter.  But  the  duties  of  the  hour  should 
be  so  planned  as  to  give  the  pastor  an  opportunity,  and 
lay  upon  him  the  necessity,  of  engaging  personally  and 
prominently  in  the  scriptural  teaching. 

Then  he  should  bring  to  that  service  the  results  of 
the  best  and  latest  biblical  scholarship  at  his  command 
He  must  have  not  so  much  the  headship  of  position  a? 
the  headship  of  work.  No  pastor  can  afford  an  idle 
Sabbatli  half-day  as  the  rule  of  his  ministry.  Never 
make  the  Sunday-school,  therefore,  a  labor-saving  expe- 
dient for  your  pulpit.  Change  only  the  form  and 
method  of  your  labor.  Prepare  for  it  with  scholarly 
fidelity  as  laboriously  as  for  a  written  sermon.  Seek  to 
elevate  and  expand  by  the  change  the  biblical  culture 
of  your  people.  If  you  can  not  do  that,  by  all  means 
let  the  present  usage  remain  intact.  Any  change  which 
only  gives  to  you  a  silent  afternoon  thrusts  you  into 
the  rear  of  the  Christian  workers  of  your  parish.  It 
drapes  your  pulpit  in  token  of  bereavement  of  its  most 
sacred  prerogative.  But  in  some  cases  the  substitution 
of  the  Sunday-school  for  the  preaching  service  of  the 
afternoon,  under  the  guidance  of  a  studious  and  quick- 
witted pastor,  is  working  with  unquestioned  success. 
Pastor  and  people  alike  are  rejuvenated  by  it. 

In  other  cases  the  "  Bible  service,"  technically  so 
called,  can  be  substituted  profitably  for  the  usual  ser- 
mon of  the  afternoon.  If  a  pastor  has  the  qualifica- 
tions requisite  for  such  a  service,  and  if  the  people  are 
convinced  of  its  value,  so  that  they  co-operate  heartily 
in  sustaining  it,  it  is  valuable  far  beyond  the  present 
second  sermon.  The  social  pliability  of  it,  the  freedom 
of  question  and  answer,  the  directness  with  which  it 
may  bring  to  expression  the  questionings  which  are  alive 
m  the  hearts  of  the  people  render  it  in  some  cases  the 


LECT.  xr.]        EXCURSUS  :    THE  BIBLE  SlfiRVICE. 


216 


most  spiritual  service   of  the   day.     Theoretically,  at 
least,  it  looks  very  promising.     It  must  be  tested  by 

time. 

But  there  are  diversities  of  gifts.     Not  every  pastor 
can  engineer  well  a  Sabbath-school.     Not  every  pastor 
can  conduct  a  Bible  service  in  a  large  assembly  with 
Socratic  wisdom.     There  are  diversities  also   of  paro- 
cliial  caliber  and  culture.     Not  every  parish  is  superla- 
tively wise.   Not  every  parish  is  open  to  the  innovations 
of  a  youthful  pastor.     Not  every  parish  is  co-operative 
with  any  pastor  in  infusing  life  into  a  public  service. 
Very  well :  do  not  try  to  force  your  own  nature  or  the 
inclinations  of  your  people  to  distasteful  experiments. 
Bend,  rather,  to  your  purpose  the  system  now  in  vogue. 
Work  into  it  an   increase   of  expository  and  textual 
preaching.     Seldom,  if  ever,   preach  two   topical   dis- 
cussions in  one  day.     Make  one^at  least,  of  your  two^ 
discourses  a  distinctively  and  specially  biblical  one  in 
material  and  form.  ^Lay  yourself  out  to  swell  the  fund 
of  biblical   knowledge   among   your   people.     This   is 
practicable  to  any  pastor  who  will  create  the  resources 
necessary  for  it  in  the  culture  of  his  own   mind.     It 
requires  more  than  biblical  learning.   It  requires  a  men-_ 
tal  assimilg-tionia-lhfi.  biblical  atmosphere  of  thought. 
It  requires  a  quick  eye,  a  ready  memory,  and  a  nimble 
tongue.     No  man  can  succeed  in  it  who  does  not  love 
Btudy,  or  who  gives  to  biblical  study  the  second  place 
in  the  habits  of  his  life,  or  who  has  not  patience  to  train 
himself  to  fluent  and  versatile  extemporaneous  speech. 
But  any  man  can  make  it  a  success  who  wiU  give  to 
it  the  same  amount  of  enthusiasm  and  of  toil  which 
achieves  success  in  other  methods  of  preaching. 

At  the  first  there  is  no  saving  of  labor;   but  when 
time  has  developed  a  prcacher^s  skill  in  the  selection 


216  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lbot.  xt 

and  working  of  biblical  materials,  and  his  command 
of  extemporaneous  utterance,  there  is  a  vast  saving  of 
labor,  because  of  the  accumulation  of  available  mate- 
rials. I  mean  a  saving  of  labor  relatively  to  the  results 
achieved.  It  would  be  more  accurate  to  say  a  more 
productive  economy  of  labor. /No  other  study  is  so 
prolific  of  the  finest  quality  and  variety  of  homiletic 
materials  as  the  study  of  the  Scriptures.  No  othei 
materials  work  into  the  realities  of  human  life  and  the 
emergencies  of  men's  souls  so  deftly  as  the  materials 
thus  gained.  Once  full  of  them,  and  with  a  mind  as- 
similated to  their  quality,  with  a  speech  which  holds 
them  at  the  tongue's  end,  a  preacher  need  never  exhaust 
himself.  He  need  never  rack  his  brain,  or  roam  the 
streets,  for  something  to  say,  and  something  to  the 
point.  The  stream  is  perennial.  It  is  the  river  of 
the  water  of  life. 

I  do  not  fepeak  on  this  subject  without  knowing 
whereof  I  aflSrm.  You  will  pardon  me  if  I  give  you  — 
what  you  will  bear  me  witness  I  do  not  often  give  in  a 
formal  way  —  a  leaf  from  my  own  experience.  I  am 
not  ashamed  to  say  that  I  spent  the  larger  part  of  the 
first  night  after  my  ordination  in  vigils  of  hopeless 
despair  of  ever  being  able  to  rise  to  the  level  of  my 
pulpit.  My  sermons  were  —  what  they  were.  I  knew 
it,  if  nobody  else  did.  The  first  gleam  of  confidence 
that  I  gained  arose  from  the  kindness  with  which  my 
very  indulgent  people  received  my  expository  remarks 
in  conference  meetings,  for  which  I  prepared  myself  as 
regularly  as  for  the  services  of  the  Sabbath. 

Led,  as  I  believe,  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  I  took  up  the 
Prophecy  of  Isaiah  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  as 
subjects  of  thorough  study.  I  devoted  to  them  from 
one  to  two  hours  daily,  using  the  best  helps  at  my 


ijBCT.  XV.]        EXCURSUS ;    THE  BIBLE  SERVICE.  217 

command.  The  first  money  I  earned  for  my  library 
was  spent  for^  books  of  sacred  literature.  Wisely  or 
unwisely  I  made  much  of  Monday  mornings  in  build- 
ing the  biblical  foundations  of  my  ministry.  The  first 
tangible  result  was  that  I  very  soon  found  the  materials 
of  sermons  thronging  upon  me  from  those  two  books  of 
the  Bible.  I  found  unique  texts  for  textual  sermons, 
compact  and  prolific  paragraphs  for  expository  sermons, 
philosophical  combinations  of  inspired  thought  which 
nothing  else  would  have  suggested  to  me,  novel  rela- 
tions of  Scripture  to  Scripture,  discoveries  of  the  secret 
harmonies  of  revelation,  adjustments  of  truth  to  popu- 
lar wants  which  I  could  have  met  in  no  other  way, 
illustrations  from  books  of  Eastern  travel,  and,  more 
than  all  else,  an  uplifting  of  my  own  mind  into  a  bibli-,,. 
cal_  atmosphere,  specially  an  atmosphere  of  faith  iij 
God  and  in  this  world's  future.  Then  followed  a 
repose  of  conscience  in  my  labor  which  was  entirely 
new  to  me. 

Before  four  months  had  passed  away  I  began  to  use 
the  results  of  my  scriptural  studies  in  my  pulpit.  On 
every  Sabbath  afternoon,  if  I  preached  twice  to  my 
own  people,  I  delivered  extemporaneously,  though  from 
a  full  brief,  a  textual  or  an  expository  sermon  on  a 
passage  selected  from  one  of  those  two  books  which 
were  the  subjects  of  my  daily  research.  The  sermon 
was  prepared  always  on  Saturday;  but  the  texts  and 
materials^were^. ready  to  my  hand  weeks  in  advance. 
After  the  first  four  months  of  my  ministry  I  never 
spent  a  quarter  of  an  hour  hunting  for  a  text  or  a  theme. 
That  course  of  biblical  sermons,  with  a  parallel  course 
of  doctrinal  discussions,  constituted  the  staple  of  my 
preaching ;  and  at  the  end  of  my  pastorate  of  six  years 
I  had  not  exhausted  those  two  books  of  the  Scriptures, 


218  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.  [lect.  xv. 

and  had  traversed  less  than  one-third  of  a  system  of 
doctrinal  theology. 

My  success  was  not  brilliant,  but  I  am  confident 
that  my  biblical  course  saved  my  pulpit.  Those  'scrip- 
tural sermons  brought  me  near  to  the  best  Christian 
experience  of  my  most  godly  hearers.  They  diversified 
aiid^simplified  my  preaching,  and  expanded  and  deep- 
ened my  range  of  thought  in  all  the  labors  of  my  pul- 
pit. They  assisted  me  greatly  in  extemporaneous 
L-^^yeiJ  Inferior  as  those  discourses  seem  to  me  now, 
and  though  I  have  no  idea  that  they  did  as  much  good 
to  any  one  else  as  to  the  preacher,  yet  I  am  sure  that 
nothing  else  of  which  I  was  master  could  have  held  for 
me  the  confidence  of  my  people  in  my  ability  to  be  their 
spiritual  teacher.  The  work  of  those  years  is  yet  tc 
be  tried  as  by  fire  ;  but,  if  any  thing  in  it  shall  bear  the 
test  by  that  purest  of  the  elements,  it  will  be  found 
in  that  part  of  the  work  in  which  I  went  before  my 
hearers  with  the  most  elaborate  and  yet  the  simplest 
results  of  my  study  of  the  word  of  God. 

I  speak  the  less  unwillingly  to  ycu  of  that  chapter 
of  my  life,  because  there  was  nothing  in  my  experiment 
which  was  the  fruit  of  genius,  or  in  any  way  exception- 
al. In  kind  it  was  a  success  which  any  one  of  you  may 
achieve,  I  hope  in  much  greater  degree.  I  beg  you  to 
try  the  experiment  for  youi selves.  Supply  your  libra 
ries  at  the  outset  with  the. be&t  works  jjd_  bil^^i^^^l  litera 
ture.  Do  not  spare  your  purses  in  so  doing.  Weai 
the  old  coat,  and  buy  the  new  book.  Incur  any  hazard 
or  hardship,  but  those  of  debt  or  dishonor,  to  get  your 
outfit  of  tools  to  work  with.  J[p\i  must  hay^.  them 
early  in  your  ministry,  if  you  are  ever  to  use  them. 
Your  wedding  can  wait,  but  your  library  can  not. 
Then  systematize  your  biblical  .s.tudie^,  and  give  your- 


UiCT.  XV.]        EXCURSTJS:    THE  BIBLE  SKR VICE.  2i(» 

jelf  to  them  religiously.  Let  the  garden  go  un  weeded, 
ind  let  the  potatoes  rot  in  the  ground.  Get  rid  of 
church  councils,  and  building  committees,  and  execu- 
tive miscellanies,  so  far  as  you  honorably  can.  Leave 
the  social  dinners,  and  the  pleasure-parties,  and  the 
regattas,  and  the  operas,  and  the  fast  horses,  to  those 
who  need  them.  Say  you,  with  Nehemiah,  to  the  mes- 
sengers who  tempt  you  to  such  things,  "I  am  doing 
a  great  work,  so  that  I  can  not  come  down :  why  should 
the  work  cease  whilst  I  leave  it  and  come  down  to 
you  ? "  Cultivate  a  stern  unity  of  purpose  in  your 
calling  of  God,  and  hold  to  it  to  the  death.  Come  thus  ^ 
to  your  biblical  sermons  with  a  full  mind  which  ^ches 
to  deliver  itself.  Get  yourself  into  a  state  of  biblical 
production  in  which  your  materials  for  the  pulpit  shall 
always  (crowd  i/ou,  you  never  hunting  them.  \ 

Keep  your  pulpit  thus  in  advance  of  your  people  in 
reverent  knowledge  of  the  word  of  God,  and  you  may 
rest  assured  that  the  question  of  the  double  service  on 
the  Sabbath  will  settle  itself,  so  far  as  your  power  to 
provide  for  it  is  concerned.  You  will  at  the  same 
time  have  the  leadership  of  your  people  in  biblical 
instruction,  without  asking  for  it.  The  pulpit  has  only 
to  take  its  own  place,  and  sustain  itself,  ably  there,  to 
have  its  biblical  leadership  acknowledged  as  its  natural 
right.  The  growth  of  such  a  ministry  in  spirit  oal 
power  is  like  the  "  path  of  the  just." 


LECTURE   XVI. 

THE   INTRODUCTION:     THEORY,   SPECIFIC   OBJECTS. 

The  subject  to  which  we  now  proceed  in  the  further 
discussion  of  the  constituent  parts  of  a  sermon  is  the 
introduction. 

I.  The  theory  of  the  introduction;  what  is  it?  In 
reply  it  should  be  observed  as  a  preliminary,  that  not 
all  that  precedes  the  announcement  of  the  subject 
is  necessarily  introductory.  In  exact  definition  we 
must  distinguish  between  preliminaries  in  general  and 
the  introduction  proper.  For  example,  the  exposition 
cf  a  text  is  not  necessarily  introductory  of  the  theme. 
It  may  take  the  place  of  an  introduction;  it  may 
render  an  introduction  proper  unnecessary;  but  in  it- 
self it  is  distinct.  An  introduction  might  exist  with- 
out a  text :  an  exposition  could  not.  An  exposition 
might  pxist  without  a  subject:  an  introduction  could 
not.  0.n  introduction  is  a  specific  process,  which  resem  » 
bies  no  other  in  the  composition  of  a  discourse. 

1st,  The  theory  of  the  introduction  relates  primarily 
to  the  mental  state  of  the  audience  respecting  the  sub- 
ject of  discourse.  There  is  my  audience,  here  is  my 
subject :  how  to  bring  the  two  together  is  the  practical 
question.  Every  public  speaker  of  much  experience 
feels  it  to  be  a  question,  often,  of  great  moment  to  his 
success.     All  good  definitions  of  an  introduction  agree 

220 


I 


LBOT.  xvi.}         THE  INTRODUCTION  :    THEORY.  221 

in  tins,  that  its  characteristic  idea  is  that  of  prepara^ 
tion  ofjbhe  minds  of  the  hearers.  To  secure  to  the 
audience  a  natural  approach  to  the  subject  and  to  its 
discuss'on  —  this  is  the  aim.  No  matter  how  this  is 
secured,  the  process  is  the  introduction.  If  you  gain  it 
without  words,  you  have  an  introduction  without  words. 
This  answers  the  inquiry,  whether  the  introduction  is  A 
always  necessary  in  a  sermon.  Some  reply  No,  and 
think  that  their  experience  justifies  them,  because  they 
sometimes  "dump"  a  subject  upon  an  audience,  without 
prefatory  remarks,  yet  apparently  without  loss  of  power. 
But  let  us  not  dispute  about  words.  Every  speaker's 
instinct  teaches  him  the  necessity  of  gradation  in  the 
progress  of  thought.  His  own  mind  has  come  to  his 
theme  by  gradation:  the  minds  of  his  hearers  must 
do  the  same.  With  no  rule  on  the  subject,  a  speaker 
of  prompt  oratorical  intuitions  will  feel  this  necessity 
of  his  hearers,  and  will  adjust  himself  to  it  as  best  he 
can.  Certain  equivalents  for  an  introduction  exist, 
which  may  enable  a  preacher  to  dispense  with  the  form 
of  it  in  words ;  but  it  is  because  the  preparative  procjess 
is  otherwise  accomplished.  That  such  a  process  is  a 
necessity  lies  in  the  nature  of  discourse.  To  omit  it 
would  be  scarcely  less  unnatural  than  day  without  a 
dawn,  and  night  without  twilight.  Nature  never  wiii« 
us  by  startling  and  convulsive  changes.  These  excite 
only  our  f^-ars.  Even  brute  mind  distrusts  nature  in 
an  earthqualie.  Gradation  is  the  law  in  all  agreeable 
mental  processes. 

This  view  of  the  general  theory  of  an  introduction 
suggests  further  that  this  part  of  a  sermon  is  sus- 
ceptible of  fin^__rhetgTi£al_4uality^  Why,  in  announ- 
cing to  a  mother  the  death  of  her  only  child,  would  you 
select  your  messenger  with  care  ?    Anybody  can  blart 


1 


222  THE  THEORY  OF  PLEACHING.  [lect.  xvi 

out  the  fact  that  a  child  is  dead.  The  hangman  might 
do  that.  But  you  desire  a  thoughtful  announcement, 
a  delicate  announcement,  a  humane,  sympathetic  an- 
nouncement. The  same  principle  holds  in  regard  to 
introduction  of  discourse.  In  it  the  rarest  qualHieg 
of  thought  and  style  are  practicable.  It  admits,  often, 
cf  rare  originality  of  thought.  The  best  method  of 
approach  to  a  theme  is  often  a  discovery  or  an  inven- 
tion. The  author  deserves  a  patent  for  it.  It  admits, 
frequently,  of  condensed  logic  in  its  structure.  Tact 
m  hints  of  argument  is  often  as  necessary  here  as  in 
the  proof  of  a  proposition.  It  admits  of  great  beauty 
of  illustration,  and  of  finish  in  diction.  The  utmost 
delicacy  of  execution  may  be  practicable  and  needful. 
Some  subjects  from  some  audiences  can  not  get  a  hear- 
ing otherwise.  *"  When  the  prophet  Nathan,  at  the  risk 
of  his  life,  sought  to  bring  King  David  to  repentance, 
his  introduction  cost  him  more  thought  than  all  that 
came  after  it.  An  accomplished  preacher  will  disclose 
his  trained  mind  and  practiced  pen  as  clearly  in  tliis  as 
in  any  other  part  of  a  sermon.  An  introduction  may 
be  as  beautiful  as  the  morning;  and  it  may  be  like 
Milton's  chaos. 

2d,  The  theory  of  the  introduction  involves  a  cer- 
tain relation  to  t^he  mental  state  of  the  speaker.  Prepa- 
ration of  the  audience  is  needful  —  for  what?  For  a 
subject  alone?  Not  so.  A  speaker's  opinion  on  the 
subject  may  contain  some  unexpected  peculiarities  for 
which  the  audience  may  need  to  be  prepared.  The 
speaker's  opinions,  with  all  that  renders  them  momen- 
tous to  his  own  mind,  are  what  is  to  be  floated  over 
from  his  mind  to  the  minds  of  his  hearers ;  and  ver} 
much  may  depend  on  a  smooth  and  rapid  launch.  But 
is  this  all?    Possiljly  rot     Preparation  of  the  audience 


LEOT.  XVT.J         THE  INTROLUCTION:    THEORY.  223 

may  be  needful  for  peculiarities  in  a  speaker's  methods 
of  discussion.  The  subject  and  the  results  being  given, 
a  process  lies  between  them  which  may  demand  pre- 
paratory forethought  to  enable  hearers  to  follow  and 
to  accept  it.  Your  method  of  argument,  your  style  of 
illustration,  omissions  which  you  purpose  may  require 
prefatory  remark  to  put  your  audience  in  the  way  )f 
your  line  of  thought. 

Again :  preparation  is  always  needed  to  secure  the 
sympathy  of  an  audience  with  the  effect  of  a  subject 
upon  a  speaker's  own  heart.  The  work  is  but  half 
completed  if  preparation  is  made  for  only  intellectual 
results.  You  are  not  only  in  possession  of  your  sub- 
ject, but  your  subject  has  possession  of  you.  You  feel 
it :  you  are  under  the  moral  dominion  of  it :  you  rep- 
resent in  your  own  person  the  effects  of  the  sermon 
you  are  about  to  preach.  A  vital  object  of  preaching, 
therefore,  is  to  lift  the  audience  up  to  the  same  level  of 
sensibility  on  which  the  preacher ,  stands.  Profound 
sympathies^are  never  spontaneous.  ^T^^^y  start  in  pre- 
liminary emotions.^  A  magnetic  line  may  sometimes  be 
laid  down  between  the  pulpit  and  the  pew  in  the  first 
five  minutes  of  the  delivery  of  a  sermon,  which  shall 
vibrate  with  electric  responses  all  the  way  through. 

8d,  We  may,  therefore,  sum  up  these  elements  o: 
tlie  general  theory  of  the  introduction  in  the  following 
definition ;  namely,  that  an  introduction  is  that  part  of 
a  discourse  which  is  designed  to  prepare  an  audience 
for  agreement  in_opmign,  and  for  syrgpathy  in  feeling 
with  the  preacher  on  the  subject  of  discourse.  Two 
Inferences  from  the  views  here  presented  deserve  notice 

(1)  It  is  obvious  that  explanatory  remarks  on  the 
text  will  often  be  an  equivalent  for  an  introduction 
Some  subjects  once  evolved  from  forcible  texts,  and 


^LriAA^WxX  ir<^^-^^fO  . 


224  rHE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.  [lbcj.  xvi 

thus  carrying  inspiied  authority  on  the  face  of  thenis 
will  speak  for  themselves,  and  speak  for  the  preacher, 
BO  eloquently  that  he  has  only  to  pass  on,  without  a 
word  of  purely  introductory  remark. 

(2)  When  explanatory  and  introductory  remarks  are 
interminglea  in  a  sermon,  this  should  be  done  intelli- 
gently. The  most  meaningless,  and  therefore  forceless 
introductions  are  made  up  of  heterogeneous  materials, 
which,  probably,  the  preacher  does  not  clearly  recog- 
nize as  one  thing  or  another.  When  you  are  sensible 
of  such  homiletic  vertigo,  stop ;  let  the  brain  clear 
itself;  start  anew,  with  clear  insight  into  your  bearings. 

II.  The  theory  of  the  introduction  is  always  the 
same,  but  it  has  specific  objects  which  are  variable. 
What  are  these  specific  objects  ?  Cicero  says  that  the 
specific  objects  of  the  exordium  are  "  redder e  auditor e^ 
henevolos^  attentos,  dociles.''''  This  statement  is  compre- 
hensive, yet  compact.  I  can  not  improve  it.  Seldom 
can  any  one  improve  a  rhetorical  statement  by  Cicero. 
He  was  that  rarest  combination  of  rhetorical  powers, 
a  prince  of  orators  and  a  prince  of  critics. 

1st,  It  may  be  the  specific  object  of  an  introduction 
to  secure  the  good-will  of  an  audience  towards  the 
preacher,  —  "  reddere  auditores  henevolosJ^  Power  over 
the  majority  of  men  is  largely  the  power  of  person. 
Even  physical  presence  is  an  important  factor  in  the 
creation  of  influence  with  the  popular  mind.  Men 
of  large  frame  and  erect  carriage  have  the  advantage 
over  diminutive  men  in  competitive  labors.  Wo  un 
consciously  admit  this  by  the  very  language  in  which 
we  describe  the  large  men.  We  talk  of  their  "cotw- 
manding  presence."  An  instinct  within  us  speaks  in 
that  phrase,  —  the  instinct  of  obedience  to  a  superior. 
Edward   Everett  used  to  lament  that  he   could  not 


LBCT.  xn.]     rNTRODUCTION :    SPECIFIC  OBJECTS.  225 

add  four  inches  to  his  stature.  In  ancient  times  the 
Psalmist  tells  us  that  a  man  was  famous  "  according  as 
he  had  lifted  up  axes  upon  the  thick  trees."  It  is  com- 
monly mentioned  as  an  anomaly  which  excites  surprise, 
that  Alexander  the  Great  and  Napoleon  the  First  were 
pmall  men. 

Mental  and  moral  qualities  are  more  vitally  repre- 
sented in  the  injffuence  of  person.  Do  not  the  words 
of  some  men  carry  weight  which  you  do  not  discover 
in  then*  sentiments  ?  \^  The  weight  is  in  the  men.  ')  Let 
an  honest  man  honestly  believe  himself  to  be  uttering 
an  original  truth,  for  the  want  of  which  the  world  is 
suffering,  and,  though  you  may  find  it  in  ^sop's  Fables, 
yet  the  chance  is  that  the  world  wilL  ask  with  a  sneer, 
"  Who  is  ^sop  ?  "  and  will  believe  in  the  man  who  is 
living  to  believe  in  himself.  This  power  of  person  is 
no  peculiarity  of  influence  with  the  uncultivated.  We 
all  illustrate  it  in  our  own  experience  as  listeners.  Do 
we  not  all  feel  the  force  of  a  good  elocution  ?  Men  of 
culture  may  be  more  quick  than  others  to  discover  a 
cheat  under  the  imposing  exterior;  but  the  imposing 
exterior  carries  weight  with  them  as  with  others. 

The  ancient  orators  cultivated  studiously  this  power 
of  person  in  the  exordiums  of  their   orations,  and   in 
their   preliminary   discipline   for   public   speech.     The       ; 
ancient  taste   seems   not   to   have  been   offended,  but     A^^ 
attracled,  rather,   by   a   freedom   of  personal   allusiou  f'  ./ 
which  was  often  cliildlike.     The   ancient  usage   is  no     ^  ll\ 
model  for  a  modern  preacher;   but   it   illustrates   the 
deference  which  the  great  orators  of  antiquity  paid  to 
the  :ubtle  magnetism  of  good-will  between  the  hearer 
and   speaker.     Edmund   Burke  would  have  been  pro- 
nounced by  the  cautious  and  painstaking  orators  of  the 
ancient  world  a  fool  for  his  recklessness  of  all  expedi- 


/l.-.^  <.<  4^ 


/    ■  !  //    (/1.V^      /*-~- 


^<'/->y,        I       Ci^     l\J  «^ 


»-t.4-'W^^t.-v^ 


226  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lkct.  x\v 

ents  of  conciliation  in  the  introductions  of  many  of 
his  parliamentary  speeches.  He  aggravated  hostility 
by  defying  it.  He  often  produced  it  by  inviting  it. 
He  gave  occasion  for  it  by  assuming  its  existenoe,  and 
answering  it  in  kind.  On  one  occasion  he  said,  "  Mr. 
Speaker,  I  rise  under  some  embarrassment  occasioned 
by  a  feeling  of  delicacy  towards  one  half  of  the  house 
and  of  sovereign  contempt  for  the  other  half."  Cicero 
would  have  pronounced  him  a  savage. 

This  power  of  person  with  an  audience  is^legiti 
mate  object  of  homiletic  culture.  Why  not?  That  ia 
a  false  sentiment  which  prompts  a  man  to  say,  "  I  wil3 
speak  the  truth,  no  matter  what  men  think  of  me.'' 
(Something  of  their  respect  for  truth  depends  on  what 
men  think  of  you. ";  Such  is  the  divine  ordinance  of 
the  ministry,  that  truth  is  never  so  powerful  that  it 
can  afford  to  part  with  that  alliance  with  the  man 
appointed  to  proclaim  it.  No  wise  preacher,  therefore, 
will  defy  a  prejudice  against  himself  among  his  hearers, 
or  invite  indifference  to  himself,  by  his  neglect  of  any 
thing  which  forethought  and  self-discipline  can  add  to 
his  power  of  person. 

Applying  these  principles  to  the  subject  of  homiletic 
introductions,  it  should  be  further  observed  that  a 
preacher  seldom  needs  to  construct  introductions  made 
up  oL fragments  of  his  personal  history.  This  ancient 
expedient,  with  rare  exceptions,  would  be  an  offense  in 
the  modern  pulpit  The  general  habit  of  the  pulpit 
respecting  things  personal  to  the  preacher  must  bs 
that  of  silence.  He  needs  the  power  of  person  which 
personal  introductions  are  aimed  at ;  no  man  needs  it 
more :  but  he  has  certain  advantages  for  gaining  it 
which  lie  back  of  the  pulpit.  His  personal  character 
is  knc  wn  to  his  hearers :    it  may  be  presumed  to  be 

A 


pi^  tAu>i,uj»^ 


LEcr.  XVI.]     INTRODUCTION :    SPECIFIC  OBJECTS.  227 

favorably  known.  Hisi  reputation  for  intelleclual  abili- 
ty speaks  for  him.  His  known  history  as  a  man  of 
culture,  as  an  alumnus  of  literary  institutions,  speaks 
for  him.  His  reputation  for  piety  precedes  and  intro- 
duces every  sermon  tliat  he  utters.  Fortunately  for 
every  individual  of  the  clerical  order,  the  order  as  a 
whole  has  an  accumulated  history  of  qualities  which 
commends  it  to  the  respect  of  men.  That  history  is  a 
common  fund  from  which  each  one  may  draw,  for  his 
own  use,  of  the  power  of  person,  till  he  does  something 
which  proves  him  unworthy  of  it.  A  preacher's  chief 
cultivation  of  the  power  of  person  must  be  outside  of 
the  pulpit.  In  his  home,  in  the  homes  of  his  people, 
in  his  study,  in  his  closet,  he  must  build  up,  in  part 
unconsciously,  the  reputation  on  which  the  power  of 
the  man  must  rest. 

Yet  it  should  be  remarked  that  every  preacher  must 
meet  some  occasions  on  which  the  introductions  of  his 
"discourses  should  be  devoted  to  the  work  of  gaining  the 
influence  of  person.  He  may  be  called  to  preach  to 
an  audience  which  he  knows  to  be  prejudiced  against 
him.  He  may  preach  to  another  which  is  sublimely 
indifferent  to  him.  Every  preacher,  even  in  the  most 
retired  and  staid  parish,  will  find  that  there  are  some 
subjects  in  regard  to  which,  if  he  would  speak,  he  must 
undo  a  personal  prejudice,  or  remove  a  suspicion,  or 
break  up  indifference,  of  which  he  is  the  object.  He 
can  be  heard  genially,  it  may  be,  on  all  subjects  but 
jue :  on  that  he  must  charm  wisely,  if  he  would  get  a 
bearing  which  shall  promise  success. 

That  was  not  a  wise  man,  who,  in  the  time  of  the 
civil  war^  in  a  South-western  State  commenced  a  ser- 
mon by*;  laying  a  revolver  on  the  pulpit  by  the  side  of 
the  Biblei^  saying  that  his  life  had  been  threatened,  and 


228  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xvn 

that  h-ri  was  prepared  to  defend  it,  as  lie  would  against 
a  mad  dog.  A  humble  Massachusetts  chaplai.i  was 
his  superior  in  homiletic  tact,  who  was  compelled  by 
Gen.  Butler  ;o  preach  to  a  wealthy  Presbyterian  con- 
gregation of  rebels  in  Norfolk,  who  were  also  in  theii 
seats  on  the  Sabbath  morning,  in  obedience  to  military 
order.  Said  the  preacher,  in  commencing  his  discourse, 
"  My  friends,  I  am  here  by  no  choice  of  mine.  I  came 
to  your  city  as  a  chaplain,  to  look  after  the  souls  of 
my  neighbors  who  are  here,  as  I  am,  under  military 
rule.  I  stand  in  the  place  of  your  honored  pastor  by 
command  of  my  military  superior ;  but  I  am  a  preacher 
of  the  same  Christ  whom  you  possess,  and  I  ask  you  to 
hear  me  for  his  sake."  He  had  a  respectful  hearing  for 
the  next  three  months. 

You  can  not  foresee  in  what  forms  the  need  of  such 
exordiums  will  arise  ;  but  every  preacher  in  a  long  min- 
istry must  meet  them,  and  his  success  must  depend 
largely  on  his  habit  of  estimating  fairly,  and  cultivating 
in  a  manly  way,  the  influence  of  person. 

2d,  The  second  specific  object  of  the  introduction 

"may  be  to  stimula;te  the  attention  of  hearers,  —  ^''red- 

dere   auditores   attentos.''''     Generally  this   is   the    chief 

object  of  the  introduction:  oftener  than  otherwise,  it 

is  the  only  object. 

(1)  Preachers  labor  under  disadvantages  in  seeking 
the  attention  of  an  audience.  The  frequency  of  preach- 
ing is  a  disadvantage.  No  other  public  speakers  speak 
BO  much  as  preachers  do.  The  unchangeableness  of 
their  audiences  is  a  disadvantage.  It  tempts  both 
hearer  and  preacher  to  listlessness.  The  pulpit  and 
the  lyceum  are  sometimes  contrasted  in  respect  to  the 
popular  interest.  You  might  as  well  compare  vegeta- 
tion with  a  cyclone.     Nobody  notices  the  one :  every 


LECT.  XVI.]     INTRODUCTION :    SPECIFIC  OBJECTS.  229 

body  is  agape  at  the  other.  A  lecturer  speiidiiig  six 
months  of  the  year  on  one  lecture,  and  delivering  it  to 
one  hundred  and  fifty  different  audiences  during  the 
other  six,  is  no  model  either  of  labor  or  of  success  to 
a  pastor.  Again:  popular  satiety  with  the  subjects  of 
preacliing  is  a  disadvantage  to  the  pulpit.  The  great 
themes  of  the  pulpit  are  well-known  themes.  The 
most  necessary  themes  are  those  on  which  a  Christian 
community  has  the  most  perfect  knowledge.  We  must 
not  ignore  these  themes;  yet  we  must  recognize  the 
satiety  of  the  people,  and  must  count  the  cost  of  meet- 
ing it.  Further :  the  indifference  arising  from  the  de- 
pravity of  hearers  is  a  disadvantage  to  the  pulpit.  The 
hostility  of  sin  is  less  to  be  feared  than  the  indifference 
of  sin.  There  is  always  hope  of  an  audience  which  can 
^e  aroused  into  a  contest  with  truth.  Dr.  Johnson 
complained  that  one  of  his  books  was  not  attacked  by 
adverse  criticism.  It  is  not  the  "hot  water"  of  our 
parishes  which  we  have  reason  to  fear :  it  is  the  lead. 

The  pulpit  needs  to  understand,  and  tacitly  concede, 
its  disadvantage  as  a  competitor  with  other  departments 
of  public  speech  for  the  interest  of  the  popular  mind. 
The  disadvantages  are  such,  that  competition  is  unrea- 
sonable. No  intelligent  critic  will  ask  it  of  the  pulpit : 
no  wise  preacher  will  attempt  it.  If  he  does,  he  ends 
inevitably  by  preaching  clap-trap.  Still  the  pulpit  in 
its  legitimate  sphere  may  do  much  to  commend  itself 
to  the  popular  attention  ;  and  this  may  be  done,  in  part, 
by  skillful  introductions. 

(2)  Therefore  an  introduction  should  avail  itself  of  the    ^    ' 
natural  curiosity  which  hearers  feel  in  the  beginning  of  ^^-^ 

a  discourse,  because  it  is  the  beginning.     The  fact  that 

it  is  the  beginning  pricks  the  ears.     The-  4rst  -sentence 
of  a  sermon  and  the  last  are  always  interesting.     That 


'iM 


^> 


230  THE  THEOKY  OF  PREACHING.  [leci.  xvl 

preicher  must  have  an  ancient  and  sublime  reputation 
for  dullness  whose  hearers  look  out  of  the  window  when 
he  begins  to  speak.  It  is  wisdom,  therefore,  to  assume 
the  existence  of  the  interest  of  curiosity,  and  to  use  it. 
It  is  always  a  safe  principle  to  begin  with  an  audience 
where  they  are.  Do  not  go  behind  or  below  them  in 
/  search  of  them.  Assume,  therefore,  the  interest  of  curi- 
osity :  fall  in  with  it  trustingly.  Never  tug  at  an  in- 
troduction as  a  thing  intrinsically  spiritless  because  it 
is  a  preliminary.  Never  distrust  its  power  to  interest. 
Treat  boldly  the  waiting  eyes  and  ears  before  you. 

(3)  Again :  the  introduction  should  direct  interest  to^ 
the  subj^.t.iji  hand^.  Assuming  that  an  interest  exists, 
give  it  an  object.  (The  b^es  are  swarming ;  give  them 
something  to  swarm  upon.  J)  That  object  must,  of  course, 
be  your  subject  of  discussion.  Chrysostom  used  often 
to  announce  the  subject  of  his  discourse  on  the  Sunday 
preceding  its  delivery.  His  object  was  to  pre-occupy 
the  minds  of  his  hearers  with  that  subject,  and  that 
only.  Whatever  may  be  said  of  such  an  expedient,  it 
gives  a  valuable  hint.  The  introduction  should  guide 
the  interest  'of  the  hearer  in  the  right  groove,  to  the 
right  end.  Therefore  a  series  of  disconnected  remarks 
can  not  form  an  introduction.  Such  a  series  may  be 
interesting.  It  may  be  original.  It  may  sparkle  with 
scintillations  of  genius.  Thought,  metaphor,  antithesis, 
apothegm,  every  element  of  material  and  form  which 
can  fascinate  a  hearer,  may  be  in  it;  but,  for  the  want 
of  coherence  and  aim,  it  is  not  an  introduction.  It  leads 
nowhere :  it  ushers  in  nothing.  Such  prefaces  are  gay 
but  meaningless  arabesques.  Furthermore :(  a  preface 
which  creates  an  independent  interest  of  its  own  is  no 
introduction.  ,/  An  introduction  is  a  tributary.  For  the 
subject,  and  for  that  only,  it  exists.     Therefore  it  is  a 


LKCT.  XVI.]     INTRODUCTION :   SPECIFIC  OBJECTS.  231 

defect  in  an  introduction,  if  it  excites  an  interest  which 
is  confined  to  itself.  This  is  sometimes  the  radical  fault 
of  initiatory  remarks,  —  they  introduce  nothing.  They 
are  interesting ;  they  are  connected ;  they  are  discourses 
in  miniature :  but  they  transfer  nothing  to  the  subject 
In  hand. 

Again  :  a  preface,  which,  though  aimed  at  the  subject 
:d  hand,  does  not  reach  it  squarely,  is  a  defective  intro- 
duction. Such  prefaces  there  are,  of  which  criticism 
can  not  say  that  they  are  disconnected,  or  that  they  are 
independent  structures,  but  only  that  they  do  not  come 
fairly  and  fully  up  to  the  theme  in  hand.  They  fall 
short  of  it,  or  on  one  side  of  it,  or  strike  beyond  it. 
They  do  not  hit  the  target  in  the  eye. 

(4)  Therefore  it  should  be  further  observed  that  an 
introduction  should  lead  the  interest  of  hearers  to  the 
subject  in  a  natural  way.  Did  you  never  listen  to 
the  announcement  of  a  proposition  which  started  the 
inquiry  in  your  mind,  "  How  did  the  preacher  come  at 
it  ?  "  Something  is  faulty  in  the  exordium  which  leaves 
honest  room  for  that  inquiry.  Every  subject  has  cer- 
tain natural  avenues  of  approach.  You  can  not  search 
them  out  by  more  circuitous  passages  without  loss. 
Our  minds  are  not  lawless  in  this  respect.  We  can  not 
help  getting  chilled  in  a  North-west  passage  round  the 
world.  We  choose,  rather,  the  international  pathway 
of  commerce.  That  introduction  is  misnamed,  which 
is  only  a  literary  adventure  from  text  to  theme. 

(5)  Again:  an  introduction  should  sometimes  direct 
the  interest  of  hearers  to  the  details^ _of  the  discussion. 
Texts  will  oftensuggest  to'  Eearefs  methods  of  discus- 
sion which  the  sermons  upon  them  do  not  realize.  Yet 
it  may  cool  the  interest  of  some  hearerSj  if  you  allow 
tJiem   to   anticipate   one   kind  of  discussion,  and  give 


232  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [leci    xw 

them  another.  Sometimes  a  text  surpasses  a  discassion 
in  solemnity,  and  the  introduction  must  be  adroitly  con- 
structed so  as  to  carry  over  the  interest  of  the  audience 
from  such  a  text  to  such  an  inferior  discussion  without 
loss.  Theodore  Parker  once  chose  for  his  text  the 
words,  "  The  harvest  is  past,  the  summer  is  ended,  and 
we  are  not  saved."  It  was  soon  after  a  presidential 
election,  and  the  body  of  the  sermon  was  devoted  to 
a  discussion  of  the  prospects  of  democracy  in  this 
country.  The  introduction  ought  surely  to  have  given 
the  hearer  some  warning  of  such  a  leap  as  that.  A 
superior  sermon  may  not  appear  superior  to  a  hearer 
who  is  disappointed  in  his  expectations. 

3d,  The  third  specific  object  of  an  introduction  may 
be  to  dispose  hearers  to  TeQ^je_hrmxi\h^j  the  sentiments 
of  a  sermon,  —  "  redder e  auditor es  doeiles.''  Men  are 
often  interested  when  not  convinced,  nor  even  predis- 
posed to  conviction.  Theirs  may  be  an  interest  of 
antipathy.  The  most  attentive  listeners  to  Dr.  Lyman 
Beecher  and  to  Dr.  GrijBfin  in  Boston  were  Unitarians. 
The  most  deeply  entranced  hearers  of  Whitefield  were 
men  who  came  with  stones  in  their  pockets  to  assault 
him. 

This  suggests  that  the  pulpit  labors  under  a  disad- 
vantage growing  out  of  the  repulsiyeness  of  many 
truths  to  the  popular  heart.  We  have  before  observed 
the  indifference  of  depravity:  its  hostility  is  also  a 
great  disadvantage.  The  pulpit  has  large  scope  for 
sanctified  tact  inanteresting  unregenerate  men  in  truth 
without  awakening  their  latent  enmity..'  If  to  awaken 
that  is  evidence  of  power,  to  win  it  over  is  evidence 
of  conquest.  In  evading  or  conquering  the  hostility 
of  hearers,  much  depends  on  securing  the  favor  of  an 
audience  to  the  person  of  a  speaker.  If  the  man  winf 
us,  he  will  the  more  probably  sway  us. 


L/SCT.  XVI.]     INTRODUCTION:   SPECIFIC  OBJECTS.  233 

Much  depends  on(^uppressing,  by  the  introduction, 
the  consciousness  of  difference  of  opinion)  between 
preacher  and  hearer.  A  French  critic  says  that  "  elo- 
quence consists  in  saying  every  thing  without  getting 
into  the  Bastille,  in  a  country  where  you  are  forbidden 
to  say  any  thing."  Every  hearer  who  dissents  from  you 
has  a  Bastille  open  for  you  in  his  own  mind.  Once  get 
your  thought  lodged  there,  and  no  "  reign  of  terror " 
can  set  it  loose  again.  The  early  abolitionists,  under 
the  lead  of  Mr.  Garrison,  attempted  to  circulate  a  pam- 
phlet w'lich  bore  the  title  "  The  American  Church  a 
Brotherhood  of  Thieves."  Was  that  a  wise  way  to 
approach  opponents  ?  Yet  some  preachers  have  as  rare 
a  talent  as  that  title  displayed  for  a  (belligerent  intro- 
duction of  truth. ,  There  is  a  class  of  men  whose  chief 
impression  in  the  pulpit  and  out  of  it  is  that  of  bel- 
ligerents. If  a  subject  of  discourse  can  be  approached 
in  a  militant  way,  they  are  sure  to  find  that  way.  (If 
there  can  be  two  opinions  upon  it,  they  are  sure  to 
advance  one  mainly  as  a  shot  at  the  other.  ^)  If  the  audi- 
mce  can  be  supposed  to  contain  opposets  of  a  truth, 
mch  preachers  instinctively  present  that  truth  as  if  it 
were  a  loaded  musket.  Unconsciously  and  blandly  they 
fire  at  men  in  smiling  ignorance  of  any  other  way  of 
approach  to  them  in  public  speech. 

This  belligerence  of  habit  is  the  secret  of  a  great  deal 
)f  preaching  at  imaginary  opponents.  In  many  sermons 
we  build  our  own  cob-houses,  and  beat  them  down,  and 
that  is  all.  Nobody  in  the  audience  is  hit.  Yst  that 
is  a  very  effective  way  of  creating  a  temporary  opposi- 
tion. Men  will  bristle  up  in  self-defense,  if  we  approach 
them  bristling.  Such  an  approach  in  preaching  is  as 
profou7id  an  error  rhetorically  as  it  is  morallj  An  ex- 
ordium  should,  if  possible,  discover   common   giound 


284         THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.    ^lect.  xvi. 

between  hearer  and  preacher.  Always  start  on  the 
common  ground,  even  if  truth  compels  you  to  leave  it. 
It  is  not  necessary  to  obtrude  into  the  foreground  the 
obnoxiousness  of  truth  to  a  depraved  heart. 

A  profound  principle  of  rhetorical  skill  is  involved 
in  the  apostolic  injunction  that  the  servant  of  the  Lord 
should  be  "  apt  to  teach,  patient,  in  meekness  instruct- 
ing those  that  oppose  themselves."  St.  Paul  himsell 
exhibited  b.  rare  example  of  this  rhetorical  skill  in  his 
»i:ress  to  the  Athenians.  We  are  told  that  his  "spirit 
was  stirred  in  him  when  he  saw  the  city  wholly  given 
to  idolatry."  A  hot-brained,  belligerent  apostle  of  a 
new  faith  would  have  blazed  out  in  a  fury  of  deriun- 
ciation.  A  man  of  fanatical  conscience,  in  which  there 
is  always  an  element  of  malign  emotion,  would  have 
talked  of  a  "brotherhood  of  thieves."  But  St.  Paul 
was  too  wise  a  man  for  that.  "I  perceive,"  he  says 
in  substance,  "  that  in  all  things  ye  are  much  disposed 
to  the  worship  of  the  gods.  Among  your  countless 
altars  I  find  one  to  the  unknown  God :  Him  declare  I 
unto  you."  This  was  a  most  beautiful  model  of  an 
eloquent  introduction. 

In  an  introduction  much  often  depends  on  an  appeal 
to  recognized  authorities.  A  genial  atmosphere  is  made 
to  envelop  a  subject,  if  a  preacher  approaches  it  by  the 
aid  of  authorities  which  the  hearers  trust,  and  which 
lend  to  it  dignity.  Here  lies  much  of  the  force  of 
biblical  references  in  an  exordium.  What  are  such 
allusions,  but  appeals  to  an  authority  which  the  hearers 
acknowledge  ?  In  this,  also,  consists  the  pertinence  of 
quoting  a  popular  proverb  in  an  introduction.  Prov- 
erbs are  the  concentrated  wisdom  of  common  sense. 
The  voices  of  ages  are  given  in  them  in  reduplicated 
echo.       The   world   recognizes   their    as  an  authority. 


pYV-^^ 


cmn.  xvT.]     INTRODUCTION :    SPECIFIC  OBJECTS.  235 

Indirectly,  but  often  perceptibly,  they  win  acceptance 
for  a  truth  which  might  not  otherwise  obtain  a  hearing. 

Much  depends,  also,  upon  a  temperate  expression  of 
truth  in  the  introduction.  Extremes  of  opinion  are  not 
winning  anywhere :  least  of  all  are  they  so  in  an  ex- 
ordium. Impassioned  utterances  which  are  natural 
elsewhere  will  seem  to  be  extremes  here.  They  need 
to  be  approached  by  gradations  of  interest.  Varied 
statement,  proof,  illustration,  all  natural  arts  of  style 
may  be  necessary  as  preparatives  for  the  utterance  of 
ultimate  views  of  truth./  Begin  the  discussion  of  bold 
opinions  as  the  new  moon  begins,  —  with  a  crescent^ 
expression  only.l  Leave  time  for  their  fullness  to  grow 
upon  the  perceptions  of  an  audience.  We  all  love  to 
be  approached  with  moderation.  Paradoxical  men  are 
not  winning  men.  The  world  entertains  an  extrava- 
gant estimate  of  those  whom  it  calls  "  safe  men."  It 
is  astonishing  what  weakness,  what  folly,  what  com- 
monplace will  be  endured  in  a  public  man,  if  he  is 
only  a  "  safe  man."  Wise-acres  are  the  most  comfort- 
able of  men ;  only  a  keen  and  irreverent  minority  find 
them  out. 

Occasionally  the  aim  of  an  introduction  must  be  to 
transform  an  existing  hostility  to  the  sentiments  of  u 
discourse.  The  occasions  for  this  are  not  numerous, 
but  no  preacher  is  free  from  liability  to  them.  Some  ol 
the  most  notable  triumphs  of  the  pulpit  have  consisted 
in  producing  revulsions  of  popular  feeling  and  in  actu- 
ally using  tho  hostility  of  an  audience  as  a  tributary  to 
the  conquest  of  their  hearts.  This  is  not  so  impossible 
as  it  seems.  A  preacher  in  such  an  emergency  is  as- 
sisted by  the  tendency  of  excited  feeling  to  produce  its 
opposite.  C  Laughter  and  tears  often  «pcceed  each  other 
rapidly  in  an  agitated  assembly.  / 


C 


233  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  Llect.  xvt 

This  principle  comes  into  play  with  peculiar  foice  in 
aid  of  a  preacher.  Conscience,  in  men  who  are  raging 
with  bitterness  towards  truth,  is  always  silently  strug- 
gling against  them.  The  spring  is  strained  against  its 
nature,  and  its  nature  is  to  seek  compensation  from 
the  opposite  extreme.  Sudden  conversions  sometimes 
Illustrate  this,  and  are  explained  by  it.  Some  of  White- 
field's  astonishing  conquests  of  hostile  audiences  are 
explained,  in  part,  on  the  same  principle.  The  most 
marvelous  evidences  of  Whitefield's  power  appeared 
often  in  the  fact  of  his  getting  a  hearing.  He  was  the 
prince  of  preachers  to  mobs.  He  chose  popular  gather- 
ings at  criminal  executions  as  favorable  opportunities 
for  preaching.  In  Wales  he  once  came  to  Hampton 
Common,  and  found  twelve  thousand  people  assembled 
to  witness  an  execution.  A  more  brutalized  audience 
could  scarcely  be  found  in  a  Christian  country.  Who 
could  hope  to  win  them  to  a  favorable  hearing  of  the 
gospel  ?  Yet  to  Whitefield  they  furnished  one  of  his 
great  opportunities. 

The  expedients  of  a  prepossessing  introduction  are, 
oftener  than  otherwise,  adopted  by  an  oratorical  in 
^  stinct.  In  listening  to  criticisms  respecting  them,  ii£e 
this  which  I  have  attempted,  the  response  is  not  un- 
natural that  they  are  cognizable  by  criticism  only  ;  that 
practically  no  one  thinks  of  them  in  the  construction 
of  so  brief  a  preliminary  as  an  exordium.  I  must  ad- 
mit that  this  is,  in  part,  true.  Preachers  who  adopt 
•vhese  expedients  successfully  are  apt  to  do  so  without 
premeditation.  They  do  it  in  the  exercise  of  the 
oratorical  instinct.  The  power  to  work  such  expedi- 
ents well  is  gained  cliiefly  by  the  cultivation  of  that 
instinct. 


LECTURE   XVII. 

rHB   introduction:    simplicity,   unity,   DlfcECTNBSa, 
CONGRUITY. 

III.   The  specific  objects  of  an  introduction  wMch        f 
have   been   considered   suggest,   further,   the    inquiry,    '^ 
What  are  the  most  important  characteristics  of  a  good 
introduction  ? 

1st,  Of  these,  the  first  in  order  and  the  first  in  im-  f 
Dortance  is  simplicity.  Remember  the  mental  state  of 
an  audience  at  the  beginning  of  an  address.  They  are 
unexcited.  They  are  at  leisure  to  criticise.  They  are 
waiting  in  suspense.  Now,  if  ever,  what  is  done  should 
seem  to  be  naturally  done.  Ease  should  pervade  the 
whole  movement.  It  may  be  elaboi-ate,  yet  should 
never  appear  so.  It  may  be  original,  novel,  striking; 
yet,  when  uttered,  it  should  seem  the  most  natural 
thing  to  say.  >- 

(1)  Simplicity  in  the  introduction  is  obviously  sacri-  '  *> 
ficed  by  abstruse  trains  of  thought.  Abstruseness  is 
rolative.  That  which  is  abstruse  to  one  audience  may 
not  be  so  to  another.  That  which  would  not  appeal 
iibs'iruse  in  the  heat  of  the  argument,  supported  before 
and  after  by  a  chain  of  reasonings,  and  to  the  level  of 
which  the  hearer  has  been  lifted  by  a  gradation  of  re- 
mark, may  be  too  obviously  elaborate  for  the  introduc- 
tion.    But  the  exclusion  of  abstruse  thought  does  not 

237 


238  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lbot.  xvn 

exclude  profound  thought  from  the  exordium.  Very 
much  profound  thought  lies  sc  near  the  surface  even  of 
the  popular  experience,  that  it  is  always  within  reach 
of  the  popular  consciousness.  It  needs  only  to  be  stated 
in  simple  diction  to  be  recognized  and  approved.  The 
most  profound  truths  of  all  real  philosophy  are  of  this 
character.  The  most  philosophical  aspects  of  religious 
truth  are  those  which  the  popular  mind  instantly  lays 
hold  of  when  they  are  clearly  stated.  Power  of  sud- 
den recognition  of  profound  truth  is  no  peculiarity  of 
educated  mind.  It  is  a  property  of  mind  as  mind. 
Deep  calleth  unto  deep  of  such  treasure  in  every  soul. 
Such  material,  therefore,  does  not  exclude  simplicity 
from  introductions,  if  a  preacher  will  only  be  content 
with  simple  forms  of  statement.  Let  alone  a  philo- 
sophical dialect ;  seize  such  thought  in  its  natural  ap- 
proaches to  the  popular  speech,  and  be  'axiie  that  the 
popular  mind  will  greet  it  with  a  welcome. 

(2)  Simplicity  of  introduction  is  sacrificed  by  pro- 
longed argumentation.  Vinet  mentions  a  sermon  by 
Bourdaloue,  which  contained  in  the  exordium  the  plans 
of  three  or  four  additional  discourses.  That  could  not 
possibly  have  been  a  good  introduction.  Lay  no  severe 
tax  here  on  the  memory  of  the  hearer.  Never  seem  to 
drag  an  audience  up  to  the  subject  by  main  force. 
Therefore  never  seem  to  climb  up  to  it  yourself,  as  the 
railway  car  climbs  Mount  Washington,  by  dint  of  iron 
chains,  and  clamps,  and  cogs.  If  they  break,  what 
becomes  of  you? 

(3)  Simplicity  of  introduction  may  Jbe  sacrificed  by 
the  utterance  of  impassioned  feeling.  In  the  order  of 
time,  thought  takes  precedence  of  emcjtion,  not  emotion 
of  thought,  y  You  must  kindle  the  fiie  before  you  can 
use  it.     Therefore,  as  a  rule,  direct  appeals  are  uneea- 


LECT.  xvn.]     THE  INTRODUCTION :    SIMPLICITY.  239 

Bonable  in  an  introduction.  A  direct  appeal  is  an  ex- 
pression of  feeling  addressed  to  feeling.  It  presupposes 
emotive  excitement  on  both  sides.  If  thrust  into  an 
introduction,  it  involves  a  waste  of  sensibility.  Dr. 
Nettleton  was  one  of  the  most  economical  of  preachers 
in  his  use  of  the  hearer's  emotions  in  the  early  part  of 
his  sermons.  He  has  been  known  to  stay  away  from 
the  pulpit  till  after  the  hour  of  service,  so  that  the  au- 
dience mighjt  become  expectant  and  impatient.  Then, 
when  he  did  begin,  he  was  often  lifeless ;  he  hesitated ; 
he  drawled ;  he  uttered  truisms,  so  that  he  might  get 
the  advantage  of  the  contrast  when  he  roused  himself 
to  preach.  These  are  artifices.  In  the  pulpit  they  are 
affectations.  But  they  illustrate  the  extreme  of  a  sound 
principle.  It  is  that  of  reserving  the  sensibilities  of  an 
audience  till  a  place  is  reached  in  the  sermon  at  which 
an  appeal  to  them  will  be  timely,  because  of  the  accu- 
mulated force  of  thought  behind. 

(4)  To  this  general  principle  adverse  to  impassioned 
introductions,  there  are  some  exceptions.  Reverting  to 
the  mental  state  of  an  audience  as  the  test,  we  derive 
the  rule.  Begin  on  a  level  with  the  hearers  in  point 
of  sensibility.  If  events  have  lifted  their  level  of  feel- 
ing, it  will  not  do  to  ignore  that  uplifting:  therefore 
sermons  on  exciting  occasions  sometimes  demand  ex- 
cited exordiums.  Sermons  at  the  height  of  a  religious 
awakening  may  admit  of  hortatory  introductions.  Ser- 
mons by  a  preacher  whose  illustrious  reputation  has 
preceded  him,  and  has  raised  great  expectations,  may 
admit  of  such  introductions.  Sermons  before  large  au- 
diences may  admit  of  the  same,  when  before  a  meager 
assembly  they  would  be  frigid.  Numbers  create  sensi- 
bility. The  juxtaposition  of  a  multitude  is  like  the  jux- 
taposition  of   burning  coals.      Therefore    an    excited 


240  THE  THEOKY  OF  PREACHING.         [lkot.  xyh 

exordium  before  such  an  audience  may  be  only  on  a 
level  with  their  mood  of  feeling. 

(5)  An  impassioned  introduction  should  not  be  mis* 
taken  for  an  abrupt  beginning  without  an  introduction. 
The  exordium  of  Cicero's  first  Oration  against  Cati- 
line is  often  adduced  as  a  case  of  impassioned  exordium. 
It  is  not  that :  it  is  only  an  abrupt  beginning  without 
exordium.  Not  one  word  of  that  renowned  invective 
is  fitted  or  designed  to  prepare  the  audience  for  the 
subject  of  the  coming  discussion.  On  the  contrary,  the 
art  of  the  orator  consists  in  an  explosion  of  his  wrath 
upon  the  traitor,  without  forewarning  either  to  him  or 
to  the  assembly.  He  vaults  into  the  subject  by  the 
spring  of  his  anger.  He  flings  it  at  the  hearers  as  if 
by  a  catapult.  The  audience  are  trembling  with  pas- 
sionate expectations.  To  begin  at  such  a  crisis  with  a 
calm  and  gradual  ascent  to  the  subject  in  hand  would 
be  like  prefixing  a  classic  exordiimi  to  the  cry  of  "  Fire !  " 
In  like  manner,  though  rarely,  a  preacher  is  so  pressed 
by  exciting  circumstances,  that  the  question  is  not 
whether  a  cool  or  an  impassioned  introduction  shall  be 
chosen,  but  whether  he  shall  have  any  introduction. 

(6)  One  form  of  hortatory  exordium  deserves  to  be 
named  as  a  more  frequent  exception  than  any  other. 
It  is  that  of  asking  for  the  devout  attention  of  hearers. 
''  Hear  ye  the  word  of  the  Lord  "  is  the  opening  appeal 
of  some  of  Isaiah's  prophetic  discourses.  Our  Savioui 
called  the  multitude,  and  said,  "  Hear  and  understand." 
St.  Stephen,  in  his  dying  address  to  the  mob,  begins 
by  saying,  "Men,  brethren,  and  fathers,  hearken." 
So,  at  the  present  day,  an  earnest  and  brief,  by  all 
means  brief,  request  that  heareis  will  give  you  a 
prayerful  attention  may  be  in  keepng  with  their  mood. 

(J)  Simplicity  of  introduction  is  further  sacrificed  by 


LECT.  XVII.]     THE  INTRODUCTION :    SIMPLICITY.  241 

an  obviously  elaborate  st}'le.  I  say  ^'  obviously  elabo« 
rate,"  because  style  may  often  be,  must  often  be,  the 
result  of  labor,  when  it  has  not,  and  ought  not  to  have, 
the  appearance  of  labor.  Cicero  says,  "  We  must  not 
depart  from  the  familiar  sense  of  words,  lest  our  dis- 
course appear  to  he  prepared  with  too  much  labor." 

For  example,  a  succession  of  inverted  sentences,  a 
atring  of  antitheses,  a  series  of  laconics,  a  protracted 
metaphor,  studied  changes  of  metaphor,  elaborate  invo- 
lutions of  style,  an  unusual  vocabulary  are  features 
of  a  style  too  labored  for  an  introduction.  The  diffi- 
culty with  such  a  style  is  that  it  attracts  attention  to 
itself.  Its  rhetorical  character,  not  what  it  expresses, 
the  form,  not  the  thing,  allures  attention.  To  be  con- 
sciously allured,  even  by  an  excellence  in  style,  to  the 
rhetorical  quality  of  it  is  an  evil.  Dr.  Whately  says 
that  if  an  absolutely  perfect  orator  could  ever  have 
existed,  his  hearers  would  not  at  the  time  have  discov- 
ered that  he  was  such.  That  discovery  would  have 
been  an  after-thought.  Eloquence  is  necessarily  unper- 
ceived  as  such.  Its  presence  is  invisible;  its  tread, 
inaudible. 

To  illustrate  one  form  of  this  defect  in  introductory 
style,  I  quote  from  a  sermon  by  Dr.  Barrow,  on  "  the 
profitableness  of  godliness."  The  preacher  starts  off  in 
the  following  canter :  "  How  generally  men,  with  most 
unanimous  consent,  are  devoted  to  profit,  as  to  the 
immediate  scope  of  their  designs  and  aim  of  their 
doings,  if  with  the  slightest  attention  we  view  wliat  ia 
acted  on  this  theater  of  human  affairs,  we  can  not  but 
discern."  This  style  is  a  fair  imitation  of  the  gait  of 
a  cantering  nag.  It  is  clumsy  style  anywhere,  but 
imagine  it  as  an  opening  sentence  !  Fancy  the  delivery 
of  it !   Who  could  escaps  with  it  the  clerical  humdrum  ? 


242  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.         [lect.  avd 

We  can  readily  believe  the  fact  stated  in  the  biographj 
of  Dr.  Barrow,  that  he  composed  many  of  his  discourses 

^  with  no  intention  of  preaching  them. 

y  2d,  The  second  characteristic  of  a  good  introduction 

^  •  is  unity. 

.  (1)  Unity  of  introduction  includes  all  that  is  essen- 

C'/  tial  to   oneness  of  impression.     Certain  ancient  homi- 

letic  writers  recognized  three  divisions  in  this  part  of 
a  discourse :  1.  The  exordium  generale^  which  was  an 
introduction  to  the  text;  2.  The  exordium  speciale, 
which  was  a  transition  from  the  text  to  the  subject; 
3.  The  exordium  specialissimum,  which  was  an  introduc- 
tion following  the  proposition,  and  preparatory  to  the 
discussion.  This  is  a  fair  symbol  of  many  introduc- 
tions in  the  practice  of  the  modern  pulpit.  They  are 
loose,  disjointed,  digressive,  exhaustive.  They  are  con- 
structed on  the  principle  of  saying  all  that  can  be  said. 
They  make  rubbish  for  the  sake  of  clearing  it  away. 

^  A  true  exordium  is  always  an  aim  and  a  shot.     No  part 

of  a  discourse  should  be  more  intensely  one  in  its  im- 
pression. 

(2)  Unity  does  not  exclude  from  the  exordium  diver- 
sity of  material.  You  may  wish  to  dignify  your  sub- 
ject, and  yet  to  remove  a  prejudice,  and,  again,  to  ex- 
plain a  peculiarity  in  your  method  of  discussion.  Very 
well :  these  are  pertinent  materials  for  the  introduction 
But  where  is  the  point  of  unity?  I  answer.  In  the 
subject.  All  these  objects  of  your  introduction  point 
inward  to  that.  They  are  radii  to  a  center;  or,  to 
change  the  metaphor,  they  are  figures  painted  in  one 
group.  If  critical  taste  can  only  fore-arm  a  preacher 
against  talking  at  random  in  this  diversity  of  remark, 
oratorical  instinct  will  use  the  diversity  in  the  service 
of  unity.     This  is  one  of  the  minutice  in  which  the 


UBOT.  xvn.]  THE  INTRODUCTION     UNITY.  243 

work  of  criticism  is  wholly  negati^  r.  It  simply  checks 
rambliDg,  and  thus  gives  the  oratorical  instinct  a  chance 
to  work.  It  will  work  as  surely  as  the  vis  medicatrix 
will  work  when  disease  is  once  held  at  bay. 

(3)  The  oratorical  instinct  thus   assisted   will  com-     A 
monly  secure   unity  of  introduction  by  subordinating  J6K 
all   other    materials    to    one.     Materials   theoretically    (^^ 
equaPpractically  fall  into  the  rank  of  subalterns  and  / 
chief.     Two  yield  to  one.  ^  The  oratorical  instinct  per- ..^j^J^ 
ceives  this,  and  it  works  as  Joseph's  fancy  did  in  his  \, 
dream:  the  inferior  sheaves  make  obei  lance.   'Criticism   \ 
has  practically  no  direct  concern  with  (t.     It  can  only     ^*««.*^ 
fend  off  intruding  materials,  leaving  th'  instinct  of  the 
orator  free  to  work  its  own  way  to  unit}  of  aim. 

(4)  Neglect  of  criticism,  however,  results  commonly  _ 
in  double-headed  introductions.     The  fonn  which  the 
want  of  unity  most  frequently  assumes  in  this  part  of 

a  sermon  is  not  that  of  incoherent  ramblii  ^,  but  that 
which  suggests  a  wavering  in  the  preache/s  jaiind  in 
the  choice  of  a  subject.  He  discourses,  first  as  if  one 
phase  of  truth  were  to  be  his  theme ;  then  as  if  not 
that  but  another  though  kindred  phase;  and  perhaps 
the  subject  shapes  itself  at  last  as  the  result  of  the 
tentative  process  through  which  his  own  mind  has 
passed  in  composing  his  exordium.^'  He  has  had  no 
controlling  wind  in  his  sails  to  carry  him  straight  on 
in  one  course.  )  The  introduction,  therefore,  flaps  first 
this  way,  then  that.  Criticism,  however,  can  do  no 
more  than  to  point  out  the  error,  and  say,  "Fix  the 
subject  to  start  vsdth.  Define  it.  Stop  that  wavering 
of  preliminary  thought.  Give  your  oratorical  instinct 
a  chance  to  work  in  its  own  way."  It  will  always 
work  in  one  way,  and  but  one.  ^^ 

3d,  The  third  characteristic  of  a  good  introduction         ^ 


'\A 


^^r^hMj 


244  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.         [lect.  xvn 

is  directness  of  approach  to  the  subject  in  hand.  Re* 
calling  again  the  mental  state  of  tho  audience,  we  ob- 
serve, that,  during  the  delivery  of  an  exordium,  they 
feel  only  the  interest  of  expectation.  This  interest  of 
expectation  is  from  its  nature  temporary.  It  flags  if 
it  is  dallied  with.  Hence  the  necessity  of  direct  ad- 
vance. Several  things  are  needful  to  secure  this  quali* 
ty  of  directness. 

(1)  The  introduction  should  not  begin  at  a  needless 
distance  from  the  subject.  No  defect  of  discourse  is 
more  frequent  than  that  here  indicated,  —  that  the 
sermon  begins  in  a  nebulous  remoteness  from  the  real 
theme.  How  many  sermons,  think  you,  are  written 
every  year  which  begin  in  the  garden  of  Eden  ?  Some- 
thing or  other  about  the  creation  of  man  is  the  first 
thought.  Adam  is  nowhere  else  so  important  a  char- 
acter, not  even  in  the  Turretinian  theology,  as  he  is  in 
the  introductions  of  sermons.  Eve  herself  was  not  so 
essential  to  the  blessedness  of  paradise  as  she  is  to  the 
comfort  of  certain  preachers  in  their  homiletic  exordi- 
ums. Long-winded  introductions  generally  possess,  in 
some  form,  this  fault  of  antipodean  beginning. 

You  will  often  find  that  the  best  beginning  is  in  the 
middle  of  your  exordium,  and  this  by  no  hap-hazard. 
The  first  half  of  an  introduction  often  represents,  not 
the  demands  of  the  subject,  but  the  disciplinary  labor- 
ing of  your  own  mind  to  come  at  the  subject.  It  may 
have  cost  you  by  far  the  most  toil;  but  it  is  the  toil  of 
mental  apprenticeship.  It  is  a  great  art,  which  does 
not  come  to  a  preacher  by  intuition,  to  be  able  to 
strike  into  the  trail  of  a  subject  at  the  outset,  just  at 
the  right  point  of  ease  in  drawing  hearers  after  you. 
Do  not  be  eoonomical,  then,  of  first  thoughts  in  the 
introduction      Let  them  go:   give  them  wings.     Theii 


LBCT.  XVI.]     THE  INTKODUCTION :    DIRECTNESS.  246 

worth  is  not  equal  to  their  cost.     If  you  afe  to  preach     \ 
on  the  perseverance  of  the  saints,  it  is  not  necessary 
to   begin   by  remarking  that  we  are  all  the  creatures         \ 
of  one   Creator.     If  you   are   to   discourse   on  infant 
baptism,   your  theme  does  not  hang  on  the  story  of  the 
deluge.     If  your  subject  is  the  fall  of  St.  Peter,  it  is         j 
not  imperative   that  you   must   start  with   the  fall  of 
Adam.    If  you  are  to  discourse  on  the  end  of  the  world,        . 
it  does  not  follow  that  you  must  begin  with  its  creation.         \ 
Begin  always  with  your  finished  thinking  on  a  subject,     ^  ^ 
not  with  your  first  crude  attempts  to  grasp  it. 

(2)  Directness  of  approach  obviously  requires  prog- 
ress of  thought.  An  introduction  should  never  return 
upon  itself.  It  should  never  do  that,  which,  in  the  ^ 
chase,  sportsmen  call  "  doubling  the  course."  Of  one 
thought  we  should  say  all  that  is  to  be  said  connectedly. 
On  the  same  principle,  the  exordium  should  never  dally 
with  a  thought.  To  linger  when  a  preliminary  is  fin- 
ished, to  pause  as  if  we  were  delighted  with  our  own 
work,  to  yawn  as  if  we  knew  not  what  to  say  next,  is 
indicative  of  any  thing  but  an  eager  mind. 

(3)  Directness  of  approach  requires  as  great  rapidity 
of  progress  as  the  nature  of  the  subject  will  permit. 
Progress  we  must  secure  always.  The  degree  of  rapidi- 
ty depends  on  the  manageableness  of  the  theme,  but 
it  is  always  safe  to  press  on.  Make  every  thing  clear 
as  you  proceed,  but  press  on.  This  one  thing  do,  for- 
getting the  things  which  ars  behind.  A  paragraph,  a 
sentence,  a  clause,  a  word,  a  syllable,  which  can  be 
omitted,  omit.  Rapidity  of  introduction  is  desirable 
especially  for  the  sake  of  brevity.  Nothing  but  expe- 
rience effectually  teaches  a  preacher  the  value  of  brevi- 
ty in  preliminaries.  Keep  your  eye  open  to  it  in  your 
own  experience.     Watch  your  subjects ;  see  how  large 


/ 


^ 


), 


246  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHIHG.         [lbjt.  xvn. 

a  propoH^ion  of  them  are  more  deftly  introdiiced  with 
few  remarks  than  with  many.  Watch  your  audi- 
ences: see  how  fresh  thej  are  for  a  discussion  where 
you  have  not  wearied  them  with  a  long  exordium. 
Watch  your  own  mind :  see  what  a  sense  cf  conquest 
you  have  when  you  have  come  up  to  a  proposition  by 
a  quick  march. 

Rapidity  of  approach  is  desirable  also  as  a  stimulus 
Id  interest.  It  is  a  stimulus  to  the  preacher.  Rapid 
movement  in  composition  exhilarates  like  riding  a  spir- 
ited horse.  On  the  same  principle,  a  rapid  introduc- 
tion is  a  stimulus  to  the  hearer.  Once  get  the  idea  into 
his  mind  that  you  do  not  mean  to  waste  words,  and  he 
will  not  waste  attention.  He  will  hear  with  the  same 
alertness  of  mind  with  which  you  speak.  Rapidity  of 
approach  to  a  subject  is  desirable,  furthermore,  for  the 
confidence  which  it  wins  from  hearers  in  the  preacher's 
mastery  of  the  subject.  Napoleon's  soldiers  trusted 
him  as  much  for  the  tremendous  marches  which  he 
gave  them  as  for  the  battles  in  which  he  led  them. 
They  used  to  say,  that,  under  his  leadership,  victory 
was  due  as  much  to  their  legs  as  to  their  arms.  On  a 
similar  principle  we  trust  or  distrust  a  speaker.  His 
quick  approach  to  a  theme,  if  it  be  clear,  is  a  sign  of 
mastery.  We  trust  him  for  the  business-like  way  in 
which  he  executes  the  first  movement. 

(4)  Directness  of  approach  is  not  abruptness.  One 
preacher  announces  his  text,  and  then  remarks,  "  Witli- 
out  further  introduction  I  invite  your  attention  to  the 
following  theme."  This  is  misnamed  an  introduction. 
Not  a  word  is  uttered  preparatory  to  the  subject.  We 
come  to  the  subject  by  no  gradation,  but  by  a  leap.  If 
you  will  observe  honestly  the  inducement  to  an  abrupt 
be^ning,  yon  will  find  that  it  is  not   any  horailetio 


i 


LKCT.  xvii.]    THE  INTROrUCTION:    CONGRUITY.  247 

advantage,  but  mental  vacuity.  We  adopt  it  Dnly  as 
a  device  of  ease.  Yet  directness  of  introduction 
admits  of  exceptions.  Eloquence  has  room  for  adroit- 
ness, if  you  please  to  call  it  such,  in  the  structure  of 
exoidiums.  Obnoxious  doctrines,  difficult  discussions, 
special  occasions,  peculiar  relations  of  speaker  to  theme 
and  of  speaker  to  hearers  may  demand  such  exordiums, 
and  to  withhold  them  for  religious  reasons  is  simply 
not  good  sense.  You  might  as  reasonably  refuse  to 
sail  obliquely  against  a  head-wind,  because  oblique 
sailing  resembles  deception. 

4th,  The  fourth  characteristic  of  a  good  introduction 
is  congruity  with  the  character  of  the  sermon. 

(1)  This  requires  that  the  introduction  be  character-       (\ 
istic^ofihe-jSubjectin  hand.     This  suggests  the  point  of 
defect  in  many  textual  exordiums.     You  will  find  it  to 

be  sometimes  the  secret  of  a  heavy  exordium,  that  the 
text  has  suggested  general  religious  ideas  not  explana- 
tory of  its  meaning,   not  needed  by  the   coming  sub- 
ject, yet  good  in  themselves ;  and  therefore  your  pen     nkH^ 
has  dropped  them  as  it  passed  along.      They  burden 
the  introduction,  as  scattered  barley  is  a  nuisance  in 
a  field  of  wheat.     Have  you  not  detected  procrusteanV 
introductions  of  this  character,  in  which  the  preacher    \ 
seems  to  have  aimed,  not  to  say  only  necessary  things, 
but   to  make  the  introduction  of  a  given  length,  no 
more,  no  less  ?     Of  such  material  as  he  has,  he  might 
add  a  page  or  subtract  a  page,  prefix  a  page  or  append 
a  page,  insert   a  page   or   intersperse   a   page,  and   it 
would  make  no  difference,  except  to  change  the  meas- 
ure.    The  subject  wculd  neither  gain  nor  lose. 

(2)  Indolent  composing  produces  ^incongruous  in- 
troductionsT^  Are  you  never  afraid  of  your  subject, 
loath  to   attack  it   at   once,  fain  to  linger  in  it|S  out* 


C-) 


l^'i 


248  THE  THEORY  OF   PREACHING.         [occT.  xva 

skirts,  pleased  to  dally  with  straggling  thoughts  which 
occur  to  you  without  effort?  In  such  moods  your 
style  of  thinking  is  not  intense.  You  do  not  glow 
with  the  consciousness  of  a  heated  theme  within.  You 
muse,  but  the  fire  does  not  burn.  You  feel  none  of 
that  necessity  of  production  which  Dr.  Arnold  said 
be  often  had  in  reflecting  upon  the  political  and  social 
state  of  England.  "I  must  write,"  he  exclaimed,  "or 
I  shall  die."  Writing  then,  there,  on  that  theme,  he 
would  inevitably  have  introduced  his  theme  in  some 
intensely  characteristic  way.  Dr.  Holmes  represents 
3ne  of  his  clerical  characters  as  publishing  a  book  of 
which  the  title  is  "  Thoughts  on  the  Universe."  Simi- 
lar to  this  are  the  introductions  composed  by  a  mind 
which  feels  no  sense  of  the  necessity  of  delivering 
itself  of  a  burning  theme.  Such  a  mind  acts  indo- 
lently. Its  work  is  discursive  and  slow.  It  will  be 
but  an  accident  of  authorship  if  the  result  is  other- 
wise. True,  a  man  can  not  feel  himself  on  the  verge 
of  syncope  in  every  introduction  that  he  composes : 
but  some  sort  of  necessity  must  crowd  him,  growing 
out  of  the  inspiration  of  his  theme. 

(3)  Congruity  of  introduction  requires  that-itJbe 
true^^Jts  own  character  as  a  tributary.  "An  exor- 
dium," says  Cicero,  "is  only  the  porch."  In  this  re- 
spect, congruity  may  be  sacrificed  by  excessive  length. 
Dr.  Johnson  has  a  lay-sermon  one-half  of  which  is 
introductory.  This  is  a  temple  one-half  of  which  is  ves- 
tibule. Entire  relevance  of  material  does  not  redeem 
an  introduction  of  this  kind.  Disproportion  is  itself 
incongruous.  Raciness  of  material  is  no  compensation 
for  prolixity.  If  it  is  not  interesting  as  a  tributary  to 
the  subject,  the  greater  the  interest,  the  greater  the 
incongruity. 


cJK».  xvu  J    THE  INTRODUCTION  :    CONGRUIlT.  249 

(4)  The  congruity  of  an  introduction  may  be  sacri^ 
ficed  by  its^ju^erjority  to  the  r^st  of  the  sermon  in  ^ 
rlietorical  qualities.  If  it  is  more  original  in  thought, 
or  more  brilliant  in  imagery,  or  more  beautiful  in  dic- 
tion, or  more  stimulating  in  historical  or  biographical 
•illusion,  or  more  compactly  finished  in  structure,  what 
Is  the  effect?  It  is  that  the  discussion  flags  in  the 
sequel.  Instead  of  rise  of  interest,  you  have  a  fall. 
Have  you  not  sometimes  been  sensible  of  an  ebbing 
of  interest  after  an  introduction  in  which  a  very  stimu- 
lating anecdote  was  told?  Through  the  whole  dis- 
course the  tide  never  reached  again  the  high-water 
mark  of  that  anecdote.  There  was  no  more  of  abso- 
lute stillness  in  the  audience,  or  other  evidence  of  en- 
tranced attention.  The  stimulus  of  the  introduction, 
whatever  be  the  source  of  it,  should  be  proportionate 
to  that  of  the  discussion,  and  therefore  must  be  in- 
ferior to  it.  A  sermon  should  never  be  remembered 
by  the  splendor  of  its  exordium. 

(5)  Congruity  of  introduction  may  be  sacrificed  by 
anticipating  in  it_niaterials  which  belong  to  the  main 
body  oftEe^sermon.  The  proper  locality  of  materials 
in  a  sermon  is  a  matter  requiring  very  delicate  adjust- 
ment. Vital  forces  may  depend  on  the  question  of 
location.  Even  the  decision  of  logical  instinct  is 
sometimes  neglected.  An  introduction  is  sometimes  so 
formed,  that  the  proposition  follows  from  it  as  a  conclu- 
sion from  premises.  The  preacher  affirms  that  this  is 
true,  and  that  is  true,  and  the  third  is  true ;  and  there- 
fore the  proposition  follows.  Then  he  proceeds  in  his 
discussion  to  prove  his  proposition.  The  first  division, 
perhaps,  explains  it ;  but  the  second  proves  it.  What 
is  the  defect  here  ?  It  is  that  of  an  incongruous  loca- 
tion of  materials.     Th3  introduction  has  been  related 


250  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.         [lkct.  xvh 

to  the  proposition  as  premise  to  conclusion.  The  propo« 
sitiqn  has  been  proved  at  the  outset,  and  now"  it  is 
proved  again  in  the  sequel.  The  introduction  has  pil- 
fered from  the  discussion.      ' 

In  other  cases,  rhetorical  instinct  must  decide  the 
question  of  location.  Here  a  more  delicate  culture  is. 
requisite.  Shall  a  didactic  paragraph  appear  as  a  pre 
liminary,  or  in  the  application?  Shall  an  original 
thought  be  used  in  the  introduction,  or  reserved  for  the 
discussion  ?  What  shall  we  do  with  a  capital  illustra- 
tion? The  logical  connections  may  not  be  decisive. 
Rhetorical  considerations  must  settle  the  question. 
The  introduction  should  lay  claim  to  nothing  which 
will  serve  the  purpose  of  the  sermon  more  effectually 
elsewhere. 

(6)  The  congruity  of  the  introduction  requires  that 
it  should  resemble  the  body  of  the^sermon— sufficiently 
to  suggest  it.  The  first  impression  which  the  front  of 
St.  Peter's  at  Rome  makes  upon  a  spectator  does  not 
suggest  to  him  a  church.  The  architecture  of  the 
grand  fagade  is  not  that  of  a  place  of  worship,  but 
rather  of  an  immense  palace,  —  rich,  gorgeous,  impos- 
ing, but  still  a  palace,  —  not  a  cathedral.  Not  unlike 
this  is  the  impression  of  the  introductions  to  some  dis- 
courses. They  naturally  suggest  something  else  than 
the  discourses  they  precede.  The  vestibule  and  the 
temple  do  not  match  well.  The  result  is  like  that  of 
the  juxtaposition  of  unsympathetic  colors. 

If,  therefore,  you  have  a  superlative  theme  of  dis- 
oourse,  and  if  your  thought  and  style  approach  its  mag- 
aificence  in  your  treatment  of  it,  let  your  introduction 
give  intimation  of  this.  Let  logic  usher  logic.  Let 
beauty  herald  beauty.  Let  grandeur  prefigure  gran- 
deur.    Let  solemnity  foreshadow  solemnity.     This  is  aa 


I.JECT.  xvii.i     THE  INTRODUGT.ON :    CONGRUITY.  251 

natural  as  that  the  primary  rainbow  should  reflect  itself 
in  the  secondary  one  in  the  sky.  If  this  kind  of  con- 
grnity  is  too  ethereal  a  grace  for  criticism  to  create,  yet 
criticism  does  much  if  it  recognizes  the  authority  of  the 
oratorical  instinct,  and  defends  it. 

(7)  Congruity  of  introduction  demands  also,  that,  if 
possible,  it  shall  cover  every  thing  in  the  sermon  which 
needs  introductory  remark.  That  is,  every  thing  in  th<^ 
discourse  which  needs  any  preparatory  work  should,  if 
possible,  be  prepared  for  at  the  beginning.  This  com- 
prehensiveness of  exordium  is  aimed  mainly  at  the  pre- 
vention of  two  defect^.  One  is  the  omission  of  some 
preparatory  remark  which  is  needed  for  subsequent 
uses.  Great  force  is  often  gained  by  making  a  conclu- 
sion seem  to  return  upon  and  illustrate  and  use  truths 
with  which  the  sermon  began.  As  a  text  may  be  thus 
used  with  effect,  so  also  may  introductory  principle^'. 
Why  did  Mr.  Webster,  at  the  close  of  his  celebrated 
imitiition  of  the  eloquence  of  John  Adams,  reiterate 
tlie  language  of  the  exordium  ?  Why  say,  "  I  leave  off 
as  I  began :  '  Sink  or  swim,  live  or  die,'  etc.  "  ?  He  did 
it  in  unconscious  obedience  to  the  oratorical  instinct 
which  invented  this  expedient  for  reduplicating  impres- 
sion. It  is  often  worth  very  much  to  be  able  to  leave 
off  as  you  began. 

If  you  will  study  critically  the  works  of  Sir  Walter 
Soott,  you  will  often  find  a  singular  compactness  of 
jstructure  connecting  his  beginnings  wath  his  endings,^ 
(The  beginnings  are  preparatory  to  the  endings^ and  tlie 
tndings  throw  back  a  light  upon  the  beginnings.  A 
perfect  discourse  will  often  have  a  similar  plot  in  its 
construction.  Its  introduction  is  a  storehouse  of  mate- 
rials which  do  not  fully  disclose  their  design  till  the 
conclusion  returns  upon  ar  J  appropriates  them.  )  When 


252  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.         [lect.  xvu. 

a  sermon  has  this  unique  and  compact  structure,  the 
introduction  and  conclusion  are  like  the  buttresses  of  a 
suspension-bridge.  One  is  as  necessary  as  the  other, 
and  they  support  all  that  hangs  between.  I  am  aware 
that  this  may  seem  fanciful  when  stated  thus  as  a  point 
in  homiletic  theory;  and  to  prove  it  by  illustration 
would  be  tedious.  Yet  you  will  all  experience  illustra- 
tions of  it  in  your  own  sermons.  Your  oratorical 
instinct  will  much  more  frequently  construct  such 
retrospective  conclusions,  if  your  introductions  are  so 
comprehensive  as  to  make  it  possible  to  "leave  off  as 
you  began." 

The  other  defect  which  a  complete  introduction  will 
prevent  is  tnat  of  a  cumbrous  jntersperftion-oLprelimi- 
naries  in  the  body  of  a  sermon.  By  observing  critically 
the  structure  of  sermons,  you  will  often  discover  a  mul- 
titude of  remarks  scattered  here  and  there,  which  are 
strictly  introductory  in  their  character.  Their  bearing 
is  preparative  entirely :  they  have  no  other  purpose. 
Now  it  is  to  explain,  then  to  excite  attention,  again  to 
dignify  the  subject;  to  do,  in  a  word,  just  that  which  it 
is  the  aim  of  the  introduction  to  do.  Some  discourses 
are  marked  by  nothing  else  so  strikingly  as  by  the 
abundance  of  these  interspersed  preliminaries.  Some 
them  must  be  interspersed ;  but  the  large  majority  can 
be,  and  ought  to  be,  packed  into  the  introduction. 

It  should  therefore  be  a  study  to  say  in  the  exor 
dium  as  nearly  as  possible  every  thing  of  a  preliminary 
nature  which  must  be  said  anywhere.  Clear  the  deck 
thus  for  action.  Sermons  which  are  begun  without  an 
introduction  are,  in  the  majority  of  cases,  laden  with 
interspersed  encumbrances ;  and  their  utteranc  $  in  the 
body  of  the  sermon  commonly  requires  more  time  than 
:f  they  are  given  in  their  proper  place  in  the  exordium. 


of     / 
m    / 


LECTURE  XVin. 

THE  INTRODUCTION:   MODESTY,   8UQGESTIVENESS. 

5th,  Continuing  the  discussion  of  the  theme  of  the 
last  lecture,  I  remark  that  the  fifth  characteristic  of  a 
good  introduction  is  modesty. 

What  does  modesty  in  an  exordium  require?  The 
reply  should  aim  at  two  things :  one  is  to  answer  the 
inquiry  as  related  to  the  exordium  alone ;  the  other  is 
to  treat  by  way  of  excursus  the  quality  of  modesty  in 
all  parts  of  pulpit  discourse.  This  is  one  of  the  many 
topics  of  homiletic  discussion  which  branch  over  the 
limits  of  the  case  in  hand.  Modesty  limited  to  the 
introduction  would  not  require  prolonged  treatment; 
but,  extended  through  a  sermon,  it  is  a  vital  quality, 
and  yet  it  comes  most  prominently  to  view  in  the 
exordium.  To  save  repetition,  therefore,  let  us  consider 
it  as  a  geneiic  quality,  essential  to  all  parts  of  effective 
speech,  the  exordium  included. 

(1)  Thus  extending  the  inquiry,  I  answer,  Modesty 
requires  a  sensible  resery^_jn_aUu^iQjis--ta--feh:e-^efS€m 
or  character  of  the  speaker.  Such  allusions  should 
be  made,  if^t  all,  only^to  meet  necessities,  never  to 
gratify  self-consciousness.  It  is  said  of  Mr.  Grattan,  the 
Irish  orator,  that  he  never  once  indulged  in  such  allu- 
sions through  his  whole  parliamentary  career.  In  lis* 
tening  for  six  years  to  the  preaching  of  Rev.  Albert 


/  oOy^w^tX/--^ 


1 


( 


254  THE  THEORY  OP  PRE&.CHING.        [lect.  xvm. 

Barnes  I  heard  but  two  allusions  to  himself  from  his 
lips.  On  the  Sunday  after  his  restoration  to  the  pulpit, 
when  he  had  been  suspended  for  heresy  for  six  months, 
and  when  a  packed  audience  had  assembled  to  hear 
from  him  a  personal  discourse,  lie  said  not  one  word 
about  himself,  or  his  recent  history. 

Three  varieties  of  fault  deserve  mention  with  special 
reference  to  the  modesty  of  the  pulpit.  Though  not 
by  any  means  limited  to  introductions,  they  are  more 
frequent  there  than  in  the  other  parts  of  a  sermon. 

/^  }  One  of  these  is  a  needless  obtrusion  of  professional  au- 

^  thority.  It  is  an  offense  in  the  pulpit,  if  the  preacher 
harps  upon  his  divine  mission,  the  sacredness  of  his 
trust,  the  solemnity  of  his  vows  of  ordination,  the 
obligation  of  men  to  hear  him  as  the  messenger  of  God. 
This  seems  very  solemn:  occasionally,  peculiarity  of 
circumstances  may  render  it  impressive.  But  it  may 
I  be,  also,  and  if  often  done  must  be,  flat  even  to  the 
/)  I  point  of  disgust.     Another  form  of  unwise  self-disclos- 

^/  ure  is  the  needless  expression  of  the  speaker's  religious 
experiences.     The  principle  here  involved  is  the  same 

J  as  before.  To  speak  of  one's  own  awe  in  view  of  the 
magnitude  of  a  subject,  of  one's  inability  to  do  justice 
to  it,  of  the  weight  of  its  burden  on  the  heart,  of  the 
prayers  and  the  tears  with  which  it  has  been  consid- 
ered, and  of  the  overwhelming  convictions  of  the  truth 
which  one  is  about  to  utter,  may  be  occasionally  per- 
tinent, and  may,  therefore,  carry  its  own  justification 
on  its  £ace.  But  it  may  also  be,  and  if  often  done  it 
must  be,  religious  twaddle.  No  man  can  safely  make  a 
hobby  of  his  own  religious  life.  Such  self-disclosure 
in  the  pulpit  will  never  be  used  by  a  modest  preacher 
as  a  homiletic  make-shift  for  a  solemn  introduction. 
The  religious  experience  of  a  preacher  must  be  worked 


LBCT.  y^m.]      THE  INTRODUCTION :   MODESTY.  255 

into  sermons  indirectly,  and  for  the  most  part  uncon- 
sciously. 

Another  form  of  immodest  intrusion  of  self  in  dis-        /f- 
course  is  a  mannerism  of  style  in  the  excessive  use  of       -/. 
the  pronoun  "I."     Have  you  ever  observed  how  much 
more  difficult  it  is  to  avoid  the  excessive  use  of  the  ego 
in  introductions  than  in  any  other  part  of  a  discourse  ? 
In  the  introduction  we  are  struggling  to  lift  our  subject 
up  into  sight.     The  mind  in  that  labor  seems  often  to 
work  as  sailors  do  in  weighing  anchor,  when  they  sing 
a  chant  which  means  nothing,  but  is  a  nervous  help  to 
the  muscular  strain.     So  a  preacher  will  measure  off  an 
exordium  with  the  formulae,  ''I  think,"  "I  suppose,"     \ 
"  I  believe,"  "  I  know,"  "  I  feel,"  when  he  is  not  at  all      ^ 
chargeable  with  conscious  egotism.     Yet  the  impression 
of  egotism  will  be  made  upon  an  audience  if  the  use  of 
the  ego  be  immoderately  frequent. 

(2)  Modesty  in  the  exordium  requires  certain  things    C  -Ly 
indicative  oj  respect  for  the  audience.     A  modest  self- 
appreciation  is  twin-brother  to  a  respectful  appreciation 
of  others.     This  will  make  itself  obvious  in  the  rela- 
tions of  a  speaker  to  his  hearers.     Among  other  things 
of  this   class   may  be  named  a  carefully  constructed 
introduction.     A  sloven  in  his  dress  betrays  disrespect 
for  others  as  wefl  as  for  himself.     So  a  heedless  jumble 
of  materials  in  an  exordium  indicates  indifference  to 
the  claims  of  an  audience  upon  a  speaker's  courtesy. 
But,  on   the   other  hand,   modesty  requires   freedom     \ 
from  excessive  care  to  make  things  plain.     Vigorous     f 
thought,  a  manly  style,  the  omission  of  needless  expla-     ' 
nations,  and  celerity  of  progress  in  the  exoidium  are     ' 
tacit  signs  of  the  speaker's  estimate  of  the  abilities  of   I 
his  hearers. 

Modesty  demands  free  lorn  from  arrogant  insinua- 


256  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [lect.  ivm 

tions.  You  may  betray  disrespect  for  your  hearers 
without  uttering  it;  in  words.  If  you  feel  it,  you  will 
insinuate  it  unconsciously.  One  preacher  says,  "If  I 
succeed  in  making  you  understand  my  meaning." 
)  Another  says,  "If  I   succeed  in  making  my  meacing 

/  y/  understood."  What  is  the  difference  ?  In  words,  al- 
1/  most  nothing:  in  spirit,  the  whole  distance  between 
respect  and  arrogance.  In  countless  forms  of  speech 
you  may  turn  a  contemptuous  shoulder  to  an  audience, 
and  yet  not  utter  a  word  of  literal  disparagement.  On 
the  same  principle,  modesty  requires  a  genial  judgment 
of  the  character  of  an  audience.  It  stands  to  reason, 
that,  if  you  would  win  men,  you  must  assume  all  that 
can  be  honestly  assumed  of  good  in  them.  Modesty  in 
any  preacher  will  breathe  into  his  discourse,  wherever 
occasion  calls  for  it,  a  genial  opinion  of  an  audience. 
Without  a  word  of  flattery,  it  will  often  disarm  a  sus- 
picion, or  break  up  indifference,  by  convincing  a  hearer 
that  you  are  predisposed  to  think  well  of  him. 

Modesty  of  discourse,  and  in  exordiums  especially, 

requires  often  a  kindly  treatment  of  the  prejudices  of 

^      hearers.     None  but  an  egotist  of  intense  type  will  fail 

\">    to  see  something  to  respect  in  a  prejudice  which  is 

r        shared  by  many  minds.     Such  a  prejudice  is  always  the 

v^  extreme  of  a  truth.     An  intelligent  preacher  can  not 

help  respecting  it,  and  he  may  honestly  express  that 

respect  as  a  help  to  correcting  it. 

J  (3)  Modesty  in  introductions,  and  elsewhere  as  weU, 

*%  ^       requires  freedomfrom  certain_affectations  ^Lexcellence 

^  in  the  preacher.     A  truly  modest  mind  is  wedded  to 

realities.     It  will  not  stoop  to  an  affected  virtue.     It 

demands,  therefore,  among  other  things,  freedom  from 

^_  U        affected  virtues  of  style.     An  inflated  style  not  only 

A*A  offends  simplicity,  as  we  have  seen,  in  the  introduction 


LEOT.  xviu.]      THE  INTRODUCTION :   MODESTY.  251 

itself,  but  it  implies  vanity  in  the  preacher.  He  affects 
a  style  which  h-?  knows  to  be  unreal  to  himself.  He 
puffs ;  he  swells ;  he  blusters.  In  like  manner,  modesty 
requires  freedom  from  an  affectation  of  dramatic  power 
in  the  preacher  The  dramatic  faculty  is  a  magnificent 
gift  for  the  uses  of  the  pulpit,  but  a  perilous  one,  there 
is  so  powerful  a  temptation  to  overact  by  affecting  a  form 
or  a  degree  of  it  which  is  unreal. 

Modesty  of  discourse,  and  in  introductions  especially, 
requires  freedom  from  an  affectation  of  humility;^  It  is 
difficult  to  say  which  is  the  more  repulsive  extreme,  — 
the  vanity  which  parades  itself  in  egotism,  or  the  vani- 
ty which  disguises  itself  in  humility.  Genuine  mod- 
esty forbids  each  as  imperatively  as  the  other.  If  an 
affectation  of  this  virtue  could  always  be  as  trans- 
parently humble  as  it  was  on  the  death-bed  of  Dr. 
Samuel  Parr,  we  might  tolerate  it  as  a  lusus  naturce, 
"  England,"  said  he,  "  has  produced  three  great  classical 
scholars :  one  was  Bentley ;  another,  Porson ;  the  third 
modesty  forbids  me  to  mention."  But  not  all  preachers 
have  the  artlessness  of  Dr.  Parr.  In  homiletic  exor- 
diums this  affectation  is  usually  found  in  the  use  of 
stereotyped  expressions  of  humility.  Confessing  per- 
sonal unworthiness,  acknowledging  that  the  sermon  is 
the  least  of  God's  mercies,  invoking  divine  forgiveness 
for  sin  about  tu  be  committed  in  the  preaching  of  it 
commonly  mean  nothing  when  thrust  into  the  prelimi- 
naries of  a  discourse.  They  are  relics  of  monastic  mor- 
bidness, which,  in  a  healthy  Protestant  mind,  may  be 
something  much  worse  than  that.  If  not  conscious 
hypocrisy,  they  may  make  the  worst  impression  of  that 
upon  an  audience. 

(4)  Modesty  of  discourse  demands  freedom  from  ex« 
cess  of  modesty.     Affected  modesty  is  not  excess,  but 


^  /krM^^    "7    ^d^.^---//. 


L 


'258  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.         [lect-.  xvin 

an  assumption  of  unreal  virtue.  A  more  respectable 
because  a  more  honest  fault  is  an  excess  of  genuine 
modesty.  In  introductions  peculiarly,  it  is  apt  to  be- 
tray itself  in  apologies  for  the  sermon,  a  pleading  for 
charitable  criticism  of  its  defects,  a  depreciation  of  the 
preacher's  abilities,  all  of  which  are  perfectly  genuine. 
They  make  the  impression  of  entire  sincerity,  yet  of  a 
morbid  selfliood.  Modesty  is  a  robust  virtue.  It  has 
in  it  a  large  vein  of  self-respect.  Tt  not  only  consists 
with,  but  i^  part  consists  in,  self-appreciation.  It  de- 
mands in  a  preacher  a  sense  of  what  is  due  to  him  as  a 
man,  and  due  to  his  professional  position  as  a  religious 
teacher.  A  cringing  introduction  may  be  becoming  to 
a  speech  on  the  scaffold,  never  to  a  sermon  in  the 
Christian  pulpit.  St.  Paul's  charge  to  Timothy  proba- 
bly had  this  virtue  in  view,  among  others,  "Let  no 
man  despise  thy  youth."  Be  a  man  in  thy  youthful 
graces.  Speak,  act,  look,  the  manly  preacher.  Robert 
Hall  said  the  same  thing  more  tartly,  when  he  advised 
that  no  man  should  ask  pardon  for  having  been  born. 

6th,  A  sixth  characteristic  of  a  good  introduction  is 
sugge^tiveness.  It  is  an  advantage  to  a  discourse,  if 
the  introductiDn  be  one  which  lays  a  moderate  but  posi- 
tive tax  upon  the  intellect  of  the  hearers.  Set  them 
to  thinking  early  in  the  progress  of  a  sermon.  Thus 
you  most  effectually  prepare  them  for  a  vigorous  train 
of  thought  in  the  sequel.  Were  you  ever  stimulated 
to  an  attentive  hearing  by  listening  to  an  introduction 
made  up  of  such  discoveries  as  these,  "man  is  every- 
where in  pursuit  of  happiness;"  "life  is  short,  and 
death  certain ;  "  "  by  all  men's  confession  all  men  are 
sinners ;  "  "  there  is  a  great  difference  m  the  characters 
of  men"?  Yet  are  not  these  weighty  truths?  Doubt- 
less.    B'lt  stupendous  truths  must  often  be  assumed  as 


?: 


4\,if^aA 


LECT.  xviiT  J    INTRODUCTION  :    SUGGESTIVENESS.  259 

too  well  known  to  excite  interest  in  their  hackneyed 
forms.  John  Foster  remarks  it  as  one  of  the  collateral 
evidences  of  human  depravity  that  men  can  think  of 
the  most  affecting  truths  without  emotion ;  but  mental 
Inertia,  on  even  the  most  appalling  realities,  is  not  neces- 
sarily a  sin.  It  may  be  only  the  inevitable  sluggishness 
of  the  intellect  over  hackneyed  thought. 

(1)  The  suggestive  quality  may  often  be  cultivated 
by  selecting  the  narrative  form  of  exordium.  Animated 
narrative  always  interests.  An  historical  incident,  a 
biographical  fact,  a  mythological  legend,  a  scientific 
phenomenon,  if  it  illustrates  a  principle  which  the  sub- 
ject needs  in  the  introduction,  may  be  the  most  stimu- 
lating material  for  your  purpose.  One  such  brief  narra- 
tive may  be  sufficient  to  save  a  hearer  from  listlessness. 

(2)  Nearly  allied  to  this  is  the  descriptive  form  of_ 
introduction.  If  description  of  a  place,  a  scene,  an 
event,  a  monument,  a  picture,  a  statue,  a  person,  a 
process  of  manufacture,  an  invention,  can  be  naturally 
made  to  freshen  a  stale  truth  of  religion,  and  if  your 
subject  needs  that  truth  in  some  unhackneyed  form, 
one  page  of  such  description  may  be  the  one  lively 
passage  which  shall  arouse  and  hold  a  hearer's  interest. 
A  good  description  is  a  truth  painted.  Almost  any- 
body wTrriook  at  a  painting  of  that  which  nobody 
WDuld  listen  to,  if  droned  in  the  ear.  Nobody  is  unin- 
terested in  an  illustrated  newspaper.  The  eye  is  a 
lens;  the  ear,  a  drum.  The  eye  magnifies;  the  ear 
only  echoes. 

(3)  Raciness  of  introduction  may  often  be  gained 
by  originality  of  philosophical  remark.  jOne  thought 
which  to  the  hearer  is  new  may  carry  the  weight  of 
many  old  thoaghts  in  company  with  it.  The  etordium 
need  not  sparkle  with  brilliants.    Even  one  old  thought 


/"• 


^Mi^iUu,...^^^  ^^^/ 


260  THE  THEORY  OF  PKEACHING.        [lkct    xvin 

vitalized  by  a  speaker's  experience  of  it,  so  that,  aa 
rejuvenated  by  him,  it  emits  the  sparkle  of  novelty 
may  set  a  hearer  upon  the  same  experience.  Original 
thinking  is  marvelously  self-diffusive.  Very  little  of 
such  thinking  exists.  One  such  thought  speedily  be- 
comes everybody's  thought.  The  reason  is  that  every- 
body's mind  is  a  fertile  soil  for  it,  and  instantly  sets  the 
reproductive  energy  of  nature  at  work.  You  can  never 
waste  a  new  thought  upon  any  audience,  if  you  succeed 
in  making  it  clear.  Fairly  plant  it,  and  nothing  is 
more  sure  to  grow. 

(4)  Suggestiveness  in  an  exordium  may  be  promoted 
by  tact  in  impro^in^Jhe  circumstances  of  an  occasion. 
Here  opens  an  immense  field  of  illustration  from  the 
history  of  eloquence.  The  pulpit  furnishes  its  full 
share.  St.  Paul's  introduction  at  Mars  Hill  is  an 
example.  Rev.  Dr.  Stillman,  a  pastor  in  Boston  in  the 
time  of  the  Revolution,  preached,  on  the  Sunday  after 
the  arrival  of  the  intelligence  from  England  that  the 
Stamp  Act  had  been  repealed,  on  this  text,  and  with 
this  introduction,  "  Were  I  to  serve  you  in  the  minis- 
try of  the  gospel  for  a  century,  I  might  never  again 
have  so  favorable  an  opportunity  to  address  you  upon 
these  words :  '  As  cold  waters  to  a  thirsty  soul,  so  is 
good  news  from  a  far  country.' "  He  then  described 
the  exultation  of  the  people  over  the  news  from  Eng- 
land, which  was  in  everybody's  thoughts,  and  from  that 
he  passed  on  to  consider  the  greater  joy  which  the  gos- 
pel should  excite  in  the  minds  of  men.  How  to  make 
the  popular  excitement  tributary  to  the  aim  of  the 
pulpit  and  the  uses  of  holy  time  was  a  critical  question. 
Many  preachers  would  have  given  it  up  in  despair,  and 
preached  a  political  harangue  in  keeping  with  the  bon- 
fires the  cinders  of  which  were  smoking  in  the  streets 


LiscT.  XVIII.]    INTRODUCTION :    SUGGESTIVENESS.  2G1 

iSfot  SO  Dr.  Stillman.  He  exhibited  his  power  to  con 
fcrol  events,  instead  of  being  controlled  by  them,  by 
that  simple  yet  really  studied  and  elaborate  exordium. 
It  combined  the  religious  spirit  of  a  preacher  with  the 
genius_j)f__an  orator. 

Great  orators  in  the  pulpit  have  generally  evinced 
their  oratorical  tact  in  turning  to  account  providential 
circumstances.  One  of  the  most  successful  pastors  of 
New  York  owes  his  reputation  largely  to  the  fact,  that, 
for  many  years  after  he  began  his  ministry,  he  em- 
ployed a  member  of  his  church  to  gather  up  for  him 
all  the  local  evencs  of  interest  occurring  during  the 
week,  in  the  politics,  the  commerce,  the  police,  and 
the  religion  of  the  city,  and  to  bring  to  him  confi- 
dentially a  resume  of  them  on  the  evening  of  Saturday. 
From  these  he  then  selected  such  as  he  could  usefully 
employ  in  introducing  his  subjects  of  discourse  on  the 
following  day.  He  had  the  reputation  of  being  a  studi- 
ous man.  His  sermons  were  evidence  that  he  did  not 
spend  his  time  in  the  streets.  Yet  often,  on  Sundays,  he 
had  a  strange  knowledge  of  events  not  announced  in 
the  papers  till  Monday  morning.  He  seemed  to  be  a 
marvelous  combination  of  the  studious  pastor  with  the 
man  of  the  world. 

(5)  The  remarks  above  made  indicate,  further,  that 
the  suggestive  q  ualityofexordiums  may  easily  b^e 
overwrought^  This  may  be  done  by  an  over-crowded 
introduction.  Being  a  preliminary,  this  part  of  a  ser- 
mon will  not  bear  to  be  crammed  with  materials.  No 
matter  how  skillfully  condensed,  it  must  not  be  burden- 
some in  its  weight.  It  ought  not  to  sparkle  aii  over 
with  gems  of  thought,  and  novelties  of  incident,  and 
inventions  of  style.  The  raciness  of  an  exordium  may 
be  overdone  by  a  startling  kind  or  form  of  material 


262  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHiNG.        [lect.  xviii. 

A  moderate  paradox  is  not  objectionable,  but  a  p^laring 
paradox4s^  intolerable.  Terrific  material  is  not  becom- 
ing to  an  introduction.  Exclamatory  exordiums  are 
generally  extremes.  The  boldest  forms  of  rhetorical 
figure,  like  vision  and  apostrophe,  are  abuses  of  the 
exordium.  Whitefield's  famous  apostrophe  to  "Father 
Abraham,"  in  his  well-known  introduction  to  the  ser- 
mon on  the  non-existence  of  sects  in  heaven,  was  too 
violent  for  the  locality  it  occupied  in  the  sermon. 

The  suggestiveness  of  an  introduction  may  be  exag- 
gerated b}^  a  hortatory  style.  Very  few  forms  of  speech 
are  so  difficult  to  sustain  as  that  of  direct  hortation. 
Extraordinary  circumstances  may  justify  it.  Chrysos- 
tom,  just  after  an  earthquake,  began  a  sermon  thus, 
"Do  you  see  the  power  of  God?  Do  you  see  the 
benignity  of  God  ?  His  power,  because  the  solid  world 
he  has  shaken ;  his  benignity,  because  the  falling  world 
he  has  supported."  We  may  safely  preach  similar 
exordiums  when  our  audiences  have  been  shaken  by 
earthquakes. 

(6)  An  inquiry  which  deserves  a  brief  excursus  from 
this  point  in  our  discussion  is  this.  Is  it  expedient  to 
preface  a  sermon  by  remarks  upon  the_topic  -of-cunent 
interest  in^he  community  at  the  time?  A  sudden 
death,  a  political  crisis,  a  recent  effort  of  charity,  a 
conflagration,  a  declaration  of  war,  an  insurrection, 
exciting  news  from  abroad  may  often  ha"ve  filled  the 
newspapers  of  the  previous  week.  Everybodj^'s  mind 
is  full  of  it.  All  are  talking  about  it,  before  the  service 
and  afterwards.  Some  preachers  so  far  bend  to  the 
breeze  of  local  excitement,  in  such  a  case,  as  to  remark 
upon  it  extemporaneously  by  way  of  preface  to  the  ser- 
mon. Is  it  a  wise  method  of  introducing  the  sermon  oi 
the  day?     Much  may  be  said  for  and  against  this  habit. 


*jtc-.  xvni.]    INTRODUCTION :    SUGGESTIVENESS.  263 

The  following  particulars  suggest  the  most  important 
j»rineiples  respecting  it. 

This  expedient  has  certain  obvious  advantages.  It  iaf 
AH  advantage  to  a  preacher  to  take  hearers  in  their  own 
mood  of  interest.  The  preacher  thus  comes  down  to 
the  hearer.  This  gives  him  a  powerful  leverage  in  his 
attempt  tc  move  them. 

It  may  be  the  means  of  augmenting  a  hearer's  respect 
for  the  preacher.  If  he  handles  the  interpolated  sub- 
ject wisely,  it  is  a  sign  of  his  intelligence,  it  is  a  token 
of  his  enterprise.  He  seems  to  know  what  is  going  on 
in  the  world.  He  reads  the  newspapers.  For  the  mo- 
ment he  is  the  peer  of  laymen  in  their  own  vocations. 
Therefor«3  this  expedient  helps  to  relieve  the  clergy 
from  the  prejudice  which  always  exists  against  them, — 
that  they  i  re  men  of  a  different  world  from  the  com- 
mon world ;  that  they  live  in  the  past ;  that  they  live 
in  abstractions  ;  that  they  move  in  ruts  ;  that  tht/  are 
so  intent  on  another  world  that  they  know  little  and 
care  little  about  this  world.  The  habit  in  question 
tends  to  rid  a  preacher  of  that  stereotyped  criticism. 

Often  such  prefatory  remarks  can  be  made  directly 
tributary  to  the  purpose  of  the  sermon.  The  theme  of 
local  interest  may  be  directly  in  line  with  the  theme 
of  discourse.  All  human  experience  is  an  illustration 
of  something  with  which  the  pulpit  is  concerned.  Hu- 
man government  illustrates  divine  government ;  human 
society  is  full  of  suggestions  of  divine  relations;  the 
events  of  evsry  man's  life  are  divine  providences ;  hu- 
man actions  are  divine  decrees;  a  sudden  death  is  a 
voice  from  eternity ;  a  shipwreck  is  a  divine  mystery 
suggestive  of  some  of  the  profoundest  problems  of  reli- 
gion ;  a  great  crime  is  a  divine  warning ;  a  great  wai 
may  be  the  fulfillment  of  a  prophecy;    a  commercial 


264  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [lkct.  xvhl 

panic  involves  the  whole  principle  of  faith,  which  is 
central  to  salvation.  The  analogies  which  bind  together 
temporal  life  and  eternal  life  are  innumerable.  The 
habit  of  a  preacher's  mind  discloses  them  to  him  in  their 
most  instructive  and  fascinating  forms.  The  Bible  it- 
icelf,  the  model  of  the  wisest  re^^'gious  teaching,  is  but 
a  section  of  real  life,  —  the  life  of  individuals,  of  fami- 
lies, of  cities,  of  nations,  of  races,  the  life  of  our  common 
humanity,  taken  from  universal  history,  and  recorded, 
xmder  divine  illumination,  for  a  divine  purpose. 

Further :  the  method  in  question  serves  to  unite  a 
heterogeneous  audience  in  the  same  mood  of  feeling. 
Often  the  prime  difficulty  in  moving  an  audience  is  that 
of  bringing  them  into  unison  about  any  thing.  Much 
is  gained  if  we  can  start  the  current  of  sympathetic 

!h  V w^^     interest.     The  magnetic  influence  of  numbers  may  sus- 

f^^^i^^i^JtJ^t&iD.  it  in  a  transfer,  when  it  is  once  in  flow.     Again : 

^^^^i    it  is  something  in  favor  of  the  device  in  question  that  it 

.^     L^ses  divine  providence  as  a  tributary  to  the  preaching 

^Xj-^y^^i  the  divine  Word.     In  the  profound  Christian  view 

fc  j    ^v     of  things,   all   events   which   arouse   communities   are 

Y^  providences.     Divine  providence  is  the  ally  of  divine 

grace;  and  divine  grace  uses  divine  providence.     The 

preacher's  words  are  the  connecting  link.     They  may 

often  be  the  "  word  in  season." 

These  are  weighty  reasons  for  the  habit  in  question, 

^  and  would  often  be  conclusive  in  the  judgment  of  an 

alert  preacher.  On  the  other  hand,  certain  perils  attend 
the  habit,  specially  if  the  habit  of  one  becomes  the  usage 
of  many.  They  may  wisely  restrict  it  to  occasional  use. 
One  su3h  peril  is  the  danger  that  it  may  occupy  time 
which  would  be  more  valuable  in  the  delivery  of  the  ser- 
mon. Often  the  sermon  will  be  such  that  not  a  moment 
should  be  added  to  the  service  of  the  pulpit  needlessly. 


LEcrr.  xvm.]    INTRODUCTION :    SUGGESTIVENESS.  265 

A  second  danger  is  that  the  topic  of  local  interest  may 
not  be  in  keeting  with  the  Lord's  Day.  The  very  thing 
most  needful  for  the  right  use  of  the  hour  may  be  to 
divert  attention  from  the  secular  fever.  A  third  peril 
may  be  that  the  subject  of  popular  excitement  will  not 
be  in  tune  with  the  sermon.  Unity  of  impression  from 
the  eervices  of  the  hour  may  be  hopelessly  destroyed 
by  it.  A  fourth  contingency  is  that  it  may  tempt  to 
ill-digested  remarks.  They  will  often  be  made  on  the 
spur  of  the  moment.  A  fifth  danger  is  that  such 
remarks  may  revive  an  interest  which  nothing  in  the 
sermon  can  equal.  The  sermon  may,  therefore,  suffer  in 
the  contrast.  Better  silence  than  such  an  overwhelming 
of  the  sermon  with  matters  superior  to  it  in  the  feelings 
of  the  hearers. 

These  are  perils  which  always  threaten  such  a  device, 
if  it  becomes  the  usage  of  the  pulpit.  They  suggest 
obvious  practical  restrictions.  The  restrictions  would, 
in  the  large  majority  of  cases,  prevent  the  expedient  in 
question  from  being  habitually  used.  They  would 
make  it  an  occasional  device,  not  a  constant  nor  a  verj^ 
frequent  one.  The  advantages  of  it  are  contingent  on 
the  avoidance  of  its  evils.  The  objections  to  it,  when 
they  apply,  are  imperative. 


tn^ 


^ .  i^a  ,^jsA^ Vjcr^ 'lecture  XIX. 


\\ 


f- 


THE  ENTEODUCTION  :   VAKIETIES,  COMPOSITION. 

IV.  We  may  gain  some  advantage  in  the  practical 
application  of  the  principles  which  have  been  thus  far 
advanced,  by  observing,  as  a  fourth  general  topic,  the 
most  important  varieties  of  method  in  approaching 
subjects  of  discourse. 

In  any  prolonged  service  in  the  pulpit,  the  most 
serious  defect  of  introductions  will  commonly  be  a  want 
of  variety.  If  you  have  ever  listened  for  years  to  the 
preaching  of  one  man,  your  experience  has  been  excep- 
tional, if  you  have  not  learned  to  anticipate  his  exor- 
diums from  the  announcement  of  his  texts.  Not  only 
is  there  a  sameness  of  individual  preachers,  but  certain 
hackneyed  introductory  thoughts  and  phrases  are  the 
common  property  of  the  pulpit.  Because  a  preacher  has 
a  text,  why  should  he  never,  by  any  felicitous  accident, 
allow  himself  to  practice  the  varied  introductipons  which 
Rre  often  so  stimulating  and  so  graceful  ii.  the  best  ad- 
dresses of  the  best  class  of  secular  orators  ?  Certain  it 
is,  tliat  the  principles  we^have  considered,  if  practically 
applied  to  the  construction  of  sermons,  would  result  in 
diversity.  The  most  important  of  these  varieties  I  pro- 
ceed now  to  name  at  the  risk  of  occasional  repetition  of 
things  already  discussed  in  other  connections. 

1st,   I  name  them  varieties  of  approach,  rather  than 

266 


LEcr.  XIX.]     THE  INTRODUCTION :   VARIETIES.  267 

introductions,  in  order  to  include  the  first  of  them, 
which  is  that  of  approach  to  a  subject  without  an 
introduction.  An  explanation  of  a  text,  and  a  deri- 
vation of  a  subject  from  it  are  often  the  whole  of  the 
preliminary  material.  Such  sermons  have  no  introduc- 
tion proper.  I  can  not  assent  to  the  view  of  Theremin, 
which  Vinet  indorses,  that  what  they  call  the  "exposi- 
tory introduction  "  is  always  suitable.  The  ..expository 
equivalent  for  an  introduction,  as  I  should  prefer  to  call 
it,  often  excludes  more  interesting  materials  which  the 
subject  needs.  Sometimes,  also,  it  is  positively  an  evil, 
because  it  is  needless.  The  text  does  not  need  it :  the 
sermon  does  not  need  it.  In  such  a  case  it  is  a  heap 
of  rubbish  thrown  in  to  fill  a  gap.  Nothing  grows  in 
it :  nothing  is  built  upon  it. 

Further:  it  has  become  a  stereotyped  formulary  of 
the  pulpit.  For  this  reason  it  is  often  less  .impressive 
than  intrinsically  it  deserves  to  be.  We  shall  be  in 
little  danger  of  an  extreme,  if  we  neyerjusejt  when  we 
can  not  defend  it  as  the  best  approach  possible.  There 
is  always  one  best  avenue  to  the  subject.  The  exposi- 
tory approach,  if  chosen,  should  be  that  one.  Choose  it 
for  its  specific  congruity,  as  you  would  choose  any  other, 
never  for  its  convenience  only,  never  in  blind  imitation 
of  clerical  usage.  One  sign  of  the  weakness  of  the 
German  pulpit  is  the  indolent  frequency  with  which 
the  text  and  the  subject  are  linked  by  the  most  tame 
of  commonplaces  in  expository  remark. 

2d,  Another  variety  may  be  named  the  introduction 
applicatory  of  the  text;  not  explanatory,  but  appiica- 
tory.  Its  design  is  to  attract  attention  to  the  subject 
of  the  text  as  one  which  concerns  the  present  audience. 
To  this  variety  belong  all  forms  of  exordium  which  are 
designed  to  modernize  the   practical  bearings   of  the 


1 


268  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lbct.  iix. 

text  The  text  is  a  promise  to  Abraham,  or  a  confes 
sion  of  David,  or  a  rebuke  to  the  Pharisees,  or  an  ex- 
hortation to  the  Church  at  Laodicea.  You  wish  to 
transfer  it  to  modern  times,  to  American  hearers,  to  a 
dozen  persons  in  the  audience  whom  you  believe  to 
need  it,  to  one  hearer  for  whom  your  whole  sermon  is 
written.  Whatever  you  say  in  making  that  transfer^ 
the  text,  and  in  aiming  it  well,  is  an  introduction  appli- 
oatory  of  the  text.  TEe~^factical  necessity  of  it  i^ 
obvious. 

3d,  Another  variety  of  approach  may  be  named  the 
introduction  intensive  of  the  text  by  comparison  with 
other  Scriptures.  It  may  be  much  to  your  purpose  to 
call  attention  to  the  fact  that  your  text  is  not  a  solitary 
one;  that  it  expresses  a  truth  often  affirmed  in  the 
Bible;  that  the  doctrine  of  St.  Paul  was  taught  by 
Moses ;  that  the  precept  of  St.  John  was  originated  by 
Christ ;  that  the  fact  in  the  Acts  was  foretold  by  Isaiah ; 
that  the  principle  in  the  Hebrews  pervades  the  whole 
economy  of  the  Old  Testament.  What  is  the  exact 
aim  of  such  comparisons  ?  Not  necessarily  explanation, 
not  chiefly  confirmation.  They  are  intensive  expedi- 
.ents.  They  magnify  the  importance  of  the  truth  which 
the  text  teaches :  they  are,  therefore,  a  purely  rhetori- 
cal method  of  setting  the  subject  in  position  before  the 
audience. 

4th,  A  fourth  variety  of  approach  is  the  introduction 
explanatory  of  principles  involved  in  the  discussion., 
You  propose,  for  instance,  to  show  "the  necessity  of 
an  Atonement  from  the  convictions  of  the  human  con- 
science." You  introduce  the  subject  by  remarks  upon 
conscience  as  a  source  of  evidence  of  truth.  You 
affirm  that  it  is  a  reliable  source ;  that  it  is  one  form  of 
divinp  revelation ;  that  the  common  sense  of  men  recog- 


LKCT.  XIX.]     THE  INTRODUCTION :    VABIETIES.  269 

nizes  its  authority.  You  proceed,  therefore,  to  interro- 
gate it,  to  learn  what  are  its  teachings  as  to  the  forgive- 
ness of  sin.  Such  a  train  of  remark  has  nothing  to  do 
with  the  text:  it  is  explanatory  of  a  principle  which 
anderlie«i  the  whole  argument  which  you  are  about  to 
anfold.  This  kind  of  introduction  elaborate  preaching 
will  often  necessitate. 

5th,  A  fifth  form  of  approach  may  be  the  introduc- 
tion narrative  of  facts  which  are  necessary  to  an  ap- 
preciation of  the  subject.  The  narrative  introduction 
looks  forward  to  the  subject,  not  backward  to  the  text. 
Dr.  Blair  introduces  a  discourse  on  "  the  value  of  reli- 
gion in  adversity  "  by  describing  human  life  as  a  series 
of  changes,  disappointments,  bereavements.  This  natu- 
rally leads  to  the  inquiry  how  men  can  best  be  pre- 
pared for  such  a  life.  The  answer  is  the  theme  of  the 
sermon. 

6th,  A  sixth  variety  of  approach  may  be  the  intro- 
duction illustrative  of  either  facts  or  principles  involved 
in  the  discussion.  "  The  moral  uses  of  the  existence  of 
wicked  men  "  is  a  profound  philosophical  subject  for  a 
sermon.  The  patriarch  furnishes  a  text  inspired  for 
the  purpose :  "  Wherefore  do  the  wicked  live  ?  "  But 
how  shall  I  come  at  the  subject  vividly  ?  How  shall 
I  approach  it  by  some  other  avenue  than  the  hack- 
neyed remarks  that  the  author  of  the  text  was  Job; 
that  he  uttered  it  in  a  mood  of  despondency;  tliat 
we,  also,  often  ask  the  same  question ;  and  so  on  ?  J 
answer,  Take  an  individual  case  of  the  injury  done 
by  one  wicked  man.  Take  such  a  character  as  that 
of  Richelieu,  or  the  Duke  of  Alva,  or  Lord  Byron,  oi 
Aaron  Burr.  Choose  your  example  shrewdly  from  thai 
class  of  minds  which  your  hearers  will  be  likely  to  ap- 
preciate.   Show  the  evil  of  one  such  life  to  the  world, 


6 


270  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lkot.  xix. 

to  the  Church,  to  the  souls  of  men.  Paint  it  till  it 
seems,  as  it  is,  a  great  mystery  that  such  men  live. 
Such  an  example  might  be  so  pictured  that  every 
hearer  in  your  congregation  would  be  silently  asking 
the  question  of  your  text  for  himself.  No  other  subject 
yhculd  seem  for  the  time  so  natural  and  so  necessary 
as  that  of  your  sermon.  To  this  class  of  exordiums 
belong  those  which  are  founded  on  historical  or  mytho- 
logical anecdote.  A  dignified  anecdote  may  illustrate 
the  germinal  principle  of  a  discourse,  and  therefore 
ma}'  iutroduce  it  felicitously. 

7th,  A  seventh  variety  of  approach  to  a  subject  may 
be  the  introduction  commendatory  of  the  subject.  The 
object  of  this  is  simply  to  exalt  the  dignity  of  the  sub- 
ject in  the  estimation  of  the  hearer.  Several  subordi- 
nate varieties  are  worthy  of  mention  under  this  class. 

(1)  One  is  that  in  which  the  commendation  consists 
in  dix^ct  assertion  of  the  importance  of  the  theme. 
An  ingenious  assertion  of  the  dignity  of  a  theme  may 
be  a  magnifying  lens  between  it  and  the  hearer.  Said 
one  preacher,  after  announcing  his  text,  "  The  truth  1 
am  about  to  discuss  is,  in  my  view,  of  such  magnitude, 
that  it  may  probably  decide  the  eternal  destiny  of  some 
20ul  which  hears  it  proclaimed  to-day." 

(2)  Another  variety  of  the  commendatory  intro- 
duction is  that  which  consists  of  a  comparison  of  the 
subject  with  an  inferior  topic  of  interest.  When  Vto- 
fessor  Webster  was  on  trial  in  Boston  for  the  murder 
of  Dr.  Parkman,  a  pastor  in  that  city  preached  on  the 
final  judgment.  He  began  by  alluding  to  the  thrilliQg 
excitement  with  which  many  of  his  hearers  had 
thronged  the  court-room  on  the  day  before ;  and  from 
that  scene  he  proceeded  to  lift  their  thoughts  up  to 
the   cjreat   tribunal,  which,  also,  they  would   one  day 


LECT.  XIX.]     THE  INTRODUCTION :    VARIETIES.  271 

throiig,  no  longer  as  spectators,  but  as  sinners  on  trial. 
Such  an  exordium  exalted  the  dignity  of  the  subject 
by  comparison  with  an  inferior  theme. 

(3)  A  third  variety  is  that  in  which  the  commenda- 
tion consists^  cumulative  remarks  from  which  the 
importance  of  the  subject  grows  into  view  gradually. 
The  plan  of  a  discourse  was  once  proposed  in  this 
lecture-room  on  "  the  ascension  of  Christ."  The  intro- 
duction was  a  series  of  philosophical  remarks.  The 
preacher  observed  that  every  event  in  the  life  of  a 
founder  of  a  new  religion  is  important  to  a  believer 
in  that  religion ;  that  this  is  eminently  true  of  Christ ; 
that  the  significance  of  Christ's  life  accumulates  in 
the  events  which  crowd  its  closing  scenes;  and  that 
with  his  ascension  are  associated  the  last  words  he 
uttered  on  earth.  From  this  series  of  reflections  the 
dignity  of  the  subject  of  our  Lord's  ascension  receives 
fresh  illustration. 

(4)  A  fourth  variety  is  that  in  which  a  subject  is       |,y» 
exalted  by  association  with  illustrious  human  authori- 
ties.    This  is  the  effect  of  exordiums  in  which  occur 

apt  quotations  of  the  opinions  of  eminent  men.  In- 
troductions in  which  expressive  proverbs  are  used  are 
of  the  same  character.  Our  sense  of  the  worth  of  the 
subject  is  stirred  by  its  association  with  authorities. 

(5)  To  these  may  be  added  a  fifth  variety  not  often 
heard  in  the  American  pulpit.  It  is  that  in  which  the 
dignity  of  the  subject  is  suggested  by  a  prayer.  In 
the  German  pulpit  one  often  hears  the  text  announced, 
and,  soon  after,  a  prayer  for  divine  guidance  in  the 
discussion  and  the  reception  of  the  theme  derived 
from  it.  In  some  parts  of  Germany  this  is  the  more 
usual  method.  What  is  the  purpose  of  that  paren- 
thetic prayer?    It  has  a  double  purpose.     It  is  an  act 


i72  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [ubot.  xix 

of  worship :  it  is  also  an  indirect  commendation  of  tie 
subject  to  the  hearers.  It  deserves  to  be  named,  be- 
cause it  exists  among  the  usages  of  the  pulpit.  Still 
it  is  not  a  natural  expedient.  A  simple  rhetorical 
taste  does  not  approve  it.  Prayer  should,  under  no 
circumstances,  be  regarded  or  used  as  a  rhetorical  expe- 
dient. To  an  American  audience,  under  any  circum- 
stances, it  has  the  look  of  sanctimonious  formality. 

8th,  An  eighth  variety  of  approach  is  the  introduc- 
tion connective  with  the  preceding  discourse.  This  will 
often,  not  always,  be  the  most  natural  exordium  in  serial 
preaching.  In  controversial  sermons  an  exordium  will 
often  grow  naturally  out  of  a  reference  to  the  dis- 
course of  the  opponent  whose  positions  you  are  con- 
troverting. The  late  Rev.  Mr.  Merrill  of  Peacham, 
Vt.,  was  once  called  upon  to  preach  to  an  audience 
which  had  just  listened  to  a  terrific  and  denunciatory 
sermon  by  a  preacher  of  the  Second  Advent.  The 
preacher's  text  had  been,  "If  they  hear  not  Moses 
and  the  prophets,  neither  will  they  be  persuaded, 
though  one  rose  from  the  dead."  When  Mr.  Meriill 
rose  to  address  them,  he  began  by  turning  the  alarm 
of  the  audience  into  mirth,  by  saying,  that,  whatever 
might  be  true  of  the  second  coming  of  Christ  and 
the  world's  end,  there  was  one  lesson  of  the  text  to 
which  they  had  been  listening,  which  the  preacher  had 
forgotten;  and  that  was  that  it  was  of  no  use  to 
attempt  to  scare  men  into  religion,  for  even  a  ghost 
could  not  do  it.  His  opponent's  whole  discourse,  and 
the  oppressive  effect  of  it  upon  the  hearers  were  swept 
away  in  a  moment  by  that  use  of  his  opponent's  text. 

9th,  A  ninth  variety  of  approach  to  a  subject  may 
be  that  in  which  the  introduction  is  a  condensed  re- 
view of  another  subject  related  to  that  of  the  sermon 


LKCT.  XIX.]     THE  INTRODUCTION :    VARIETIES.  27S 

In  hand.  Some  subjects  are  the  natural  preliminaries 
to  other  subjects :  therefore  a  natural  introduction  of 
one  proposition  may  be  an  epitome  of  a  discussion  of 
another.  You  will  often  find  in  published  discourses 
the  introductions  of  which  strike  you  as  especially 
weighty,  that  those  introductions  are  practically  com- 
pressed preliminary  discussions.  You  may  find  that 
you  have  yourselves  sometimes  unconsciously  fallen 
upon  this  method  of  introduction.  Without  designing 
it,  you  observe  that  a  peculiarly  rich  exordium  to  one 
of  your  own  sermons  would,  with  little  or  no  change, 
be  itself  the  plan  of  a  distinct  discourse.  Your  ora- 
torical instinct  has  done  just  that  which  rhetorical 
criticism  would  have  advised  as  an  expedient  of  con- 
densation. This,  if  not  carried  to  an  extreme,  is  a 
grand  quality  in  preaching.  It  enriches  the  productions 
of  the  pulpit.  Often  it  is  a  necessity.  No  other  form 
of  exordium  seems  natural,  for  the  want  of  this. 

10th,  A  tenth  variety  of  approach  to  a  subject  may 
be  the  introduction  which  consists  of  a  request  for 
the  attention  of  an  audience.  Some  subjects  as  de- 
veloped from  some  texts  need  no  other  introductory 
process  than  this.  A  sacramental  sermon  may  be  so 
far  suggested  to  a  hearer  by  the  time,  the  place,  the 
symbols  before  him,  and  by  the  preparatory  lecture, 
that  no  other  preparatory  process  is  needful  than  the 
single  step  of  asking  the  audience  to  follow  you  in 
certain  meditations  on  a  certain  theme.  Liable  as  this 
method  is  to  abuse,  it  is  legitimate.  It  is  not  neces- 
sarily confined  to  a  brief  and  single  request.  It  may 
be  expanded  into  an  appeal  for  devout  attention,  for 
patient  attention,  for  an  uninterrupted  attention. 

I  sum  up  the  result  of  our  discussion  of  the  intro- 
duction, thus  far,  in  this  enumeration  of  varieties,  not 


274  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHiNQ.  [lbot.  xix 

as  furnishing  models  by  example,  not  as  a  schedule 
from  which  selection  in  any  given  case  can  be  made. 
They  are  useless  for  any  such  purpose.  The  main 
object  of  the  enumeration  is,  by  thus  grouping  these 
varieties  together,  to  illustrate  how  much  variety  is 
practicable.  There  is  no  need  of  humdrum.  There 
is  no  need  of  the  uniform  expository  equivalent  for  an 
intrOdUCtfogl  ir^bu  are  once  possessed  of  this  con- 
viction, and  if,  then,  your  critical  judgment  is  disci- 
plined by  practice  to  a  varied  selection  of  methods, 
your  rhetorical  instinct  will  at  length  work  uncon- 
sciously in  shaping  this  part  of  a  sermon,  as  in  every 
other.  Your  exordiums  will  be  rich,  inviting,  quicken- 
ing, because  they  will  be  growths,  —  natural  growths, 
—  not  pieces  of  mechanism. 

V.  Before  passing  to  the  next  topic  of  discussion  in 
the  analysis  of  a  sermon,  I  wish  to  suggest  a  few  hints  on 
the  work  of  composing  the  introduction.  The  exor 
dium  has  been  called  a  preacher's  cross.  It  is  the  most 
facile  subject  of  criticism,  but  the  most  difficult  of  exe- 
cution. Vinet  says  that  it  is  like  the  fine  and  precise 
operations  in  mechanics,  in  which  every  workman  may 
end  in  success,  but  only  after  having  broken  more  than 
once  the  instruments  employed.  You  have  probably 
already  experienced  in  some  degree  the  common  lot  of 
preachers  in  this  respect.  A  subject  has  opened  richly 
to  your  mind ;  thoughts  upon  it  have  been  fluent  and 
affluent ;  illustrations  of  it  have  been  luxuriant ;  details 
of  style,  even,  have  flashed  upon  you  invitingly ;  your 
fingers  have  felt  nimble  with  the  pen ;  and  you  could 
have  plunged  into  the  heart  of  the  discussion  with 
bounding  eagerness.  But  this  drudgery  of  an  introduc- 
tion has  balked  you ;  it  has  exhausted  your  invention ; 
it  has  chilled  your  imagination ;  it  has  put  out  the  light 


LBCr.  XIX. ]     THE  INTRODUCTION  :    COMPOSITIOIi .  275 

of  your  subject ;  and  you  have  found  yourself,  perhaps, 
floundering  in  the  middle  of  it,  as  in  a  slough  of  de- 
spond, feeling  no  bottom,  and  unable  to  reach  a  margin. 
Perhaps,  after  a  hard  morning's  work,  the  thing  is  fin- 
ished; but  it  dissatisfies  and  annoys  you;  it  seems 
forced,  insignificant,  disjointed,  objectless ;  and  you  feel 
that  a  critic,  comparing  your  mental  labor  with  its 
result,  would  be  severe,  but  severely  just,  in  saying  with 
Ahimaaz,  "  I  saw  a  great  tumult,  but  I  knew  not  what 
it  was."  To  those  beginners  in  the  work  of  sermoniz- 
ing who  know  any  thing  of  this  experience,  the  follow- 
ing hints  will  not  be  untimely. 

1st,  Define  to  your  own  mind,  to  start  with,  the 
specific  object  of  the  introduction  in  the  case  in  hand. 
Inquire,  What  does  this  subject,  as  I  propose  to  treat 
it  on  this  occasion,  for  this  audience,  need  in  the  way 
of  preparatory  remark ?  does  it  need  one  thing?  more 
than  one?  any  thing?  what  is  the  most  imperative 
thing?  will  the  expository  equivalent  be  the  best  thing? 
not  will  the  expository  equivalent  be  passable,  occupy 
the  time,  but  will  it  advance  my  work  to  the  heart  of 
the  discussion  in  the  most  natural  and  quickening  way  ? 
These  questions,  perhaps,  may  be  answered  in  the  ask- 
ing ;  but  they  should  be  asked.  No  other  composing  is 
so  difficult  as  that  in  which  the  mind  does  not  know 
itself.  Did  you  ever  witness  the  composition  and  the 
chirography  of  "  Planchette  "  ?  How  the  pen  sprawls  and 
splutters,  and  caricatures  sense,  till  it  requires  an  expert 
in  "  spiritualistic  "  phenomena  to  make  sense  of  it !  Like 
that  is  the  composing  of  an  exordium  in  which  the  pen 
does  the  work  without  a  self-conscious  and  intent  mind 
behind  it. 

The  effect  is  as  painful  to  the  hearer  as  to  the 
preacher,  if  you  labor  to  introduce  a  subject  which 


V 


276  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  fLEor.  xix. 

needs  no  introduction.  It  resembles  the  awkwardness 
of  introducing  to  each  other,  with  fastidious  forms  of 
politeness,  two  strangers,  as  you  suppose,  who  happen 
to  have  been  old  friends  before  you  were  born.  It  is 
equally  painful  to  see  a  preacher  laboring  at  the  wroiig 
object  in  an  exordium.  Why  should  you  insinuate 
your  way  along,  like  an  Indian  warrior  in  the  grass, 
against  a  prejudice  which  nobody  feels?  Why  vindi- 
cate your  divine  commission  before  an  audience  in 
which  nobody  doubts  it?  Why  affirm  and  prop  up 
your  right  to  speak  when  the  fact  of  your  speaking 
is  a  proof  of  your  right  ?  Why  wriggle  your  way  to  a 
theme  which  is  one  of  the  standard  subjects  of  the  pul 
pit?  Why  begin  at  the  expulsion  from  Eden,  to  bring 
up  the  attention  of  your  hearers,  by  slow  and  zigzag 
approaches,  to  a  present  emergency  which  they  are 
trembling  with  eagerness  to  meet?  What  would  Cicero 
have  achieved  in  the  first  oration  against  Catiline,  if  he 
had  begun  with  the  story  of  Romulus  ? 

More  distressing  still  is  it  to  see  a  preacher  laboring 
in  an  exordium  without  an  object.  This  you  will  find 
to  be  sometimes  your  real  peril.  We  lounge  and 
saunter  into  some  introductions.  We  must  say  some- 
thing. Something  comes  to  mind  which  we  can  say. 
It  may  surely  enough  as  well  be  said  now  as  ever ;  and 
down  it  goes  upon  the  page,  and  we  try  to  feel  encour- 
aged that  we  have  made  a  beginning.  Then  we  go  up 
and  down  in  the  earth,  seeking  what  we  may  devour, 
till  with  another  remark,  and  a  third,  and  a  fourth,  we 
have  gathered  a  sufficient  number  to  make  up  a  loose, 
ragged,  patched  piece  of  manufacture,  rather  than  of 
brain-work,  which,  by  the  usage  of  the  books,  we  call  an 
introduction.  But  it  has  no  object;  therefore  no  cohe- 
sion ;  consequently,  for  the  purpose  of  an  exordium,  no 


LKc^.  XIX.]     THE  INTRODUCTION  :    COMPOSITION.  277 

meaning.  One  of  the  old  creeds  found  in  the  archives 
of  a  certain  church  in  this  State,  and  once  presented 
according  to  the  ancient  Congregational  usage,  by  a 
candidate  for  admission  into  the  church,  commences 
thus :  "  I  believe  in  one  God.  I  believe  that  he  is  the 
Creator  of  the  heavens  and  the  earth.  I  believe  tha< 
he  made  this  world,  partly  out  of  nothing,  and  partly 
out  of  unfit  matter."  f  A  good  symbol  that  of  the  mate- 
rials of  some  introductions  to  sermons,     y 

2d,  Review  the  growth  of  your  subject  in  its  working  ^ 
upon  your  own  mind.  Every  subject  on  which  you  are 
at  all  prepared  to  preach  has  a  history  in  your  own 
thinking.  It  has  a  growth  there.  You  have  not  come 
to  it  at  a  bound.  There  is  an  avenue  of  thought  some- 
where by  which  you  have  come  into  consciousness  of 
that  growth.  Some  good  angel  has  been  practicing  an 
introduction  of  that  subject  upon  you.  Look  back, 
therefore,  and  recall  your  own  mental  history  upon  it. 
What  has  interested  you  in  it?  what  has  defined  it 
clearly?  what  illustrations  of  it,  or  about  it,  have 
made  it  vivid  ?  what  uses  of  it  have  been  valuable  to 
you?  Two  benefits  will  be  likely  to  follow  from  such 
inquiries.  They  will  commonly  suggest  the  best  mate- 
rials for  an  introduction  of  the  subject  to  an  audience. 
Nothing  else  is  so  prolific  of  available  thought  for 
transmitting  a  truth  as  the  history  of  one's  own  mind 
upon  it.  That  which  has  clarified  a  subject  to  you  will 
he'p  you  to  invent  ways  of  clearing  it  to  others.  Diffi- 
culties conquered  often  show  how  they  might  have 
been  avoided.  A  fortress  taken  by  storm  discloses 
how  it  might  have  been  taken  by  stratagem.  So  your 
conquest  of  a  subject  may  put  you  in  possession  of  the 
means  of  leading  others  to  it  without  the  struggle  of 
conquest. 


278  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xix 

Your  own  history  upon  a  subject  will  be  likely,  also^ 
to  save  you  from  the  error  of  assmning  too  much  in 
•favor  of  the  intelligence  of  your  hearers.  This  is  some- 
times the  occasion  of  a  defective  exordium.  It  assumes 
too  much  knowledge,  too  much  interest,  too  much 
readiness,  therefore,  to  follow  the  discussion.  It  gives 
to  hearers  no  sufficient  time  or  help  to  grow  to  the 
j5ubject  as  the  preacher  grew  to  it  in  his  experience 
Results  of  a  long  mental  training  are  sprung  upon  a 
hearer  unawares.  You  will  be  spared  this  mistake,  if 
you  consider  wisely  the  process  of  your  own  mind  in 
mastering  your  theme.  If  preliminary  thinking  was 
necessary  to  you,  still  more  may  it  be  so  to  your  audi- 
ence.^ You  will  not  be  likely  to  ask  them  to  leap  a\ 
chasm  under  which  you  were  obliged  to  dig  a  tunnel.  ^ 
/  3d,  Compose  the  introduction  with  the  whole   dis- 

\  course  in  view.  Does  not  this  suggest  a  very  obvious 
y  cause  of  unfitness  in  many  exordiums?  They  are  writ- 
ten before  the  subject  is  mentally  digested.  I  some- 
times detect  evidence  in  sermons  that  the  introduction 
was  written  before  the  subject  was  even  defined.  The 
preacher  has  started  with  a  text,  and  has  written  up 
to  the  proposition.  What  the  subject  is  has  shaped 
itself  on  the  way.  A  good  exordium  can  not  possi- 
bly be  composed  thus  at  random.  To  construct  and 
charge,  and  aim  and  discharge,  an  introduction  well, 
you  must  know  what  you  want  to  introduce.  The 
subject,  the  discussion,  the  application,  all  the  struc- 
tural elements  of  the  sermon,  should  be  before  you. 
The  living  spirit  of  the  sermon,  too,  must  be  in  you, 
A  lifeless  exordium  is  often  lifeless  for  the  reason 
that  it  has  no  living  union  with  the  subject  in  the  mind 
uf  the  preacher.  He  has  mechanized  it,  instead  of  graft- 
Kig  it.     Worse  even  than  that,  it  may  be  a  piece  of 


LECT.  rii.]     THE  INTRODUCTION:    COMPOSITION.  279 

dead  timber  nailed  to  a  living  tree.  You  can  not  neu- 
tralize this  error  by  any  artifices  of  style.  Nothing  can 
live  but  life. 

4th,  Therefore  do  not  compose  the  introduction  till 
the  plan  of  the  whole  discourse  is  outlined.  Write  out 
a  plan  of  the  entire  sermon  from  text  to  finis ;  adjust 
the  form  of  the  proposition ;  devise  the  outline  of  the 
argument;  invent  the  chief  illustrations;  shape  the 
application;  decide  upon  the  method  of  closing:  in  a 
word,  get  every  thing  before  you  which  is  to  be  intro- 
duced. Put  it  on  paper,  if  your  mind  needs,  as  many 
do,  the  help  of  the  eye.  Then  you  know  what  the  ex- 
ordium ought  to  be :  you  can  set  about  it  intelligently, 
and  you  will  save  time  by  this  preliminary  work  of 
getting  ready  to  work.  Why  not,  then,  write  the  body 
of  the  sermon  in  full  before  composing  the  exordium  ? 
Some  advocate  this.  I  would  not  say  that  it  should 
never  be  done.  Some  minds  may  work  well  in  that  way ; 
out  the  majority  of  minds,  I  think,  will  experience  in 
it  this  disadvantage,  that,  when  the  body  of  a  sermon 
is  written  in  full,  the  mind  of  the  preacher  has  lost  the 
introductory  mood.  This,  too,  is  a  matter  for  experi- 
ment. In  composing  a  sermon,  you  will  discover  that 
your  mind  moves  with  your  work.  Transitions  in  that 
are  changes  of  mental  mood  in  you.  Your  sensibilities 
change  with  the  demands  of  your  work.  You  pass 
through  an  introductory  mood,  an  argumentative  mood, 
an  illustrative  mood,  an  applicatory  mood  At  the  close 
you  are  absorbed  in  practical  application.  The  excite- 
ment of  your  sensibilities  is  more  intense  than  it  was,  or 
ought  to  have  been,  at  the  beginning.  It  is  not  natural, 
then,  for  your  mind  to  go  back  upon  its  track,  and  set 
about  introducing  the  theme. 

5th,  Throw  yourself  into  the  work  with  enthusiasm. 


280  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xix 

Daniel  Webster  said  of  the  American  Revolution,  thai 
our  fathers  went  to  war  against  a  preamble.  A  pre 
amble,  then,  may  be  the  very  gist  of  the  business 
Treat  it  as  such  in  sermonizing.  Prepare  an  introduc- 
tion as  if  every  thing  depended  on  the  first  impression. 
Strike  as  if  the  blow  were  to  be  like  that  of  stamping 
a  coin  —  there  being  no  second  blow. 

Critics  have  observed  of  Shakespeare,  that  he  always 
aims  to  make  his  characters  define  themselves  at  their 
first  appearance.  Their  individuality  is  clear  in  the 
first  words  they  utter.  They  never  run  together  in 
our  first  conceptions  of  them.  They  are  like  faces 
with  strong  features:  we  see  them  once,  and  always 
remember  them.  Guizot  observes  of  Othello  and  Des- 
demona,  that  their  characters  are  distinct  on  their  first 
appearance,  though  one  speaks  but  thirty  lines,  and 
the  other  but  fifteen.  So  introductions  should  be 
composed  with  keen  appreciation  of  the  significance  of 
first  impressions.  I  repeat,  therefore,  make  a  busi- 
ness of  them.  Be  in  earnest  in  them,  and  you  will  find 
earnest  hearers  from  the  very  first  word.  Not  only 
strike  when  the  iron  is  hot,  but  make  it  hot  by  striking. 
Modern  science  tells  us  that  motion  is  heat:  a  blow, 
therefore,  evolves  heat.  A  flash  of  fire  is  often  visible 
at  the  moment  and  at  the  spot  at  which  a  solid  can- 
non-ball strikes  the  plate  of  an  iron-clad  ship.  The  prin- 
ciple involved  in  the  phenomenon  is  as  true  of  mind  as 
of  iron.  Mind  has  a  quality  corresponding  to  that  by 
which  iron  evolves  latent  heat.  The  concussion  of  mind 
with  mind  will  often  evolve  an  interest  which  will  make 
itself  obvious  in  the  faces  of  hearers.  It  is  quickening 
to  a  speaker  to  observe  the  instantaneousness  with  which 
the  first  gleam  of  earnest  working  on  his  part  will  repro' 
duce  itself  in  an  audience 


u£Ci.  XIX.]     THE  INTRODUCTION  :    COMPOSITION.  281 

Dr.  John  Blair  Smith,  president  of  Hampden-Sidney 
College,  was  the  most  eloquent  preacher  of  his  day  in 
Virginia.  He  was  accustomed  to  write  in  full  no  part 
of  his  sermons,  except  the  introductions.  These  he 
elaborated  with  unwearied  care.  Such  introductions  ]. 
gave  to  a  man  of  his  temperament  a  momentum  in  pub-  j^ 
lie  address  which  enabled  him  to  proceed  extempora- 
neously on  the  same  level.  His  experience  justified  hia 
estimate  of  the  value  of  a  good  beginning. 


r^j^^^(fW^f^/.n^j    i\^ 


^ 


Y^ 


itf^ 


LECTURE  XX. 

THE  PROPOSITION:   DEFINITION,   NECESSITY. 

)  The  proposition  is  that  part  of  a  discourse  by  which 
A  its  sul^jecLis  d&fined.  It  includes,  therefore,  but  is  not 
'  restricted  to,  that  which  is  termed  proposition  in  the 
nomenclature  of  logic.  It  embraces  all  varieties  of 
rhetorical  form  by  which  a  subject  is  indicated  to  the 
audience.  An  interrogative  may  be  in  rhetorical  dia- 
lect the  proposition  of  a  sermon. 

I.  Upon  this  latitude  in  the  signification  of  the 
term  depends  the  answer  to  the  first  question  which 
meets  us  in  the  discussion  of  the  thing ;  namely,  Ts  the 
statement  of  a  proposition  necessary  to  the  complete- 
ness of  a  discourse?  Let  us  understand  clearly  the 
limits  of  the  question.  It  is  not  whether  a  point  to  be 
[»roved  is  essential  in  every  discourse ;  it  is  not  whether 
tlie  most  scholastic  form  of  statement  is  necessary  to 
the  proposition ;  it  is  not  whether  any  single  form  of 
statement  should  be  invariable  in  the  proposition.  The 
only  point  of  mquiry  on  which  difference  of  opinion 
can  exist  is  this,  Should  the  subject  of  a  sermon  inva- 
riably be  so  stated  as  to  make  hearers  sensible  at  the 
moment  that  the  subject  is  defined  ? 

In   discussing   this  inquiry,   I   aim    at  three  things. 

' )    One  is  to  establish  the  affi^ative ;  another  and  more" 

V)     essential  one  is  to  illustrate  the  vitality  which  inheres 

282 


liSCT.   XA.j 


THE  PROPOSITION:    NECESSITY.  283 


: 


in  this  very  brief  fragment  of  a  sermon ;  and  the  most  J 
essential  of  all  is  to  vindicate  that  style  of  thinking  in 
the  pulpit  to  which  a  definite  statement  of  propositions 
and  divisions  is  a  necessity.  I  say  propositions  and 
divisions,  because  the  practical  question  covers  both; 
and  we  shall  avoid  repetition  by  considering  once  for 
all  those  bearings  of  it  which  concern  the  style  of 
thinking  in  the  pulpit  which  divisions,  as  well  as 
propositions,  represent. 

It  may  seem  disproportionate  to  discuss  in  a  suc- 
cession of  lectures  a  fragment  of  discourse  which 
may  occupy  but  a  single  line  in  the  writing,  and  less 
than  a  breath  in  the  delivery.  But  the  disproportion 
is  like  that  of  treating  by  an  octavo  volume  of  medical 
discussions  only  the  single  topic  of  an  organ  of  the 
body  which  you  can  hold  in  the  palm  of  your  hand. 
The  proposition  is  to  the  discourse  what  the  heart  is  to 
the  physical  system.)  The  relation  is  organic.  Because  - 
it  is  so,  the  questionfof  statement  or  no  statement  can  not 
be  fairly  dismissed  as  a  question  of  form  only.  It  is  a 
question  of  the  inner  quality  of  preaching.  Decide  it 
in  one  way,  and  you  decide  in  sympathy  with  shallow 
and  effervescent  preaching.  Decide  it  otherwise,  and 
you  cultivate  thoughtful,  solid,  elemental  preaching. 
This  will  be  obvious  from  a  consideration  of  the 
following  particulars.  j 

1st,  The  oratorical  instinct  of  a  good  speaker  de-  A 
mands  that  he  shall  have  a  proposition.  Expressed 
or  latent,  the  proposition  must  exist.  We  acknowl- 
edge this  in  the  demand  which  we  make  upon  every 
speaker,  that  he  shall  "speak  to  the  point."  What 
point  ? 

2d,  The  instinct  of  good  hearing   demands,  on  the 
same  principle,  that  a  speaker  shall  state  his  proposi- 


iV   ' 


3 


'i 


5". 


284  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.  [lect.  xx 

tion.  For  what  purpose  does  a  speaker  need  to  have  a 
proposition  for  which  the  hearer  does  not  also  need  the 
statement  of  the  proposition?  There  is  a  hearing  to 
the  point,  which  is  correlative  to  speaking  to  the  point. 
The  eje  follows  the  arrow  most  easily  if  it  sees  the 
target. 

3d,  It  lies  especially  in  the  nature  of  a  spoken  address 
that  it  needs  a  statement  of  the  theme.  If  an  essay 
written  might  dispense  with  this,  not  so  a  speech 
delivered.  In  hearing,  do  we  not  instinctively,  and 
soon  after  the  commencement  of  an  address,  ask  our- 
selves. What  would  the  speaker  be  at?  what  is  the 
aim?  where  is  the  target?  If  it  seems  to  be  con 
cealed,  are  we  not  restless  till  it  is  discovered  ?  This 
mental  experience  of  a  hearer  is  only  the  silent  demand 
made  upon  the  preacher  that  he  shall  not  orJy  have  a 
proposition,  but  shall  announce  it.  The  instinct  of 
hearing  and  the  instinct  of  speech,  in  this  respect,  are 
of  one  mind. 

4th,  The  j)opular_^lrd  js^peculiarly  dependent  on 
'  knowledge  of  the  theme  as  an  aid  to  unity  of  impres- 
siofi^^  Performers  on  the  tight-rope  steady  their  whole 
muscular  system  by  fixing  the  eye  intently  on  a  point 
in  the  distance.  Thus  they  cross  a  ravine  where  the 
wavering  of  the  eye  might  be  death.  Not  unlike  this 
is  the  mental  effort  by  which  the  common  mind  must 
often  follow  the  mental  operations  of  its  superior.  The 
knowledge  of  the  subject  at  the  outset  will  be  to  the 
power  of  attention  what  the  fixed  eye  is  to  the  muscles 
of  the  gymnast. 

5th,  The  subjects  of  the  pulpit  are  in  their  nature 
liable  to  confusion  in  the  popular  conceptions  of  them. 
At  this  point  the  inquiry  before  us  ceases  to  be  a  ques- 
tion of  forms:   it  deepens  into  a  question  of  things. 


LKCT.  XX.]  THE  PROPOSITION :   NECESSITY.  285 

Let  the  following  particulars  be  observed,  in  the  way 
of  exmrsus  from  the  question  of  form  into  the  tiling 
which  it  represents. 

(1)  The  common  mind  is  burdened  with  the  sense  of 
sameness  in  the  discourses  of  the  pulpit.  No  other 
criticism  of  the  pulpit  is  so  common  as  this,  "The 
preacher  repeats  himself.  He  is  for  ever  reiterating 
the  old  story."  This  does  not  always  imply  fault  in 
the  preacher.  Hearers  judge  of  sermons  by  their  own 
consciousness  of  the  effect  of  sermons.  Sameness  of 
effect  IS  often,  in  their  judgment,  equivalent  to  same- 
ness in  materials.  If  the  shot  fall  fast  and  long  in  one 
spot,  they  lose  the  sense  of  succession  in  the  sense  of 
continuity.  The  tendency,  therefore,  is  to  a  fusion  of 
the  popular  conceptions  of  truth.  Such  fusion  is  con- 
fusion. Thoughts  on  religious  themes  run  together, 
and  themes  themselves  are  blended  in  the  popular 
theology. 

(2)  The  tendency  to  confusion  of  religious  thought 
often  increases  with  the  excitement  of  religious  emo- 
tions. Nothing  in  the  nature  of  religious  sensibility 
protects  it  from  that  law  of  mind  by  which  thought 
and  emotion  are  often  in  inverse  proportion.  Hence 
revivals  of  religion  are  in  one  aspect  occasions  of 
unusual  peril  to  religious  character.  This  is  especially 
true,  if  revivals  occur  under  the  lead  of  uneducated  or 
iucautious  preachers.  President  Edwards  thought  it 
necessary  to  publish  his  work  on  "  The  Religious  Affec- 
tions." as  a  corrective  of  errors,  and  a  protection  against 
daugsrs,  into  which  the  churches  of  New  England  were 
falling.  Such  errors  and  danger's  were  involved  in  an 
indiscriminate  interest  in  religion,  arising  from  the  dis- 
proportion between  emotive  excitement  and  thoughtful 
convictions  m  the  experience  of  converts.     Audience* 


/ 

/ 


286        •  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.     [i.bct.  xx. 

which  Whitefield  addressed  were  sometimes  swayed  by 
the  mere  infection  of  sympathy  to  the  very  circumfei' 
ence  of  the  twenty  thousand  in  the  field,  when  it  was 
physically  impossible,  in  the  case  of  thousands,  that  they 
should  have  heard  one  word  from  the  preacher's  voice. 

Hume  relates,  that  he  was  present  on  one  such  occa- 
sion, when  the  audience  was  so  immense  and  so  restless, 
that  no  human  voice  could  have  been  intelligibly  heard 
by  them  all.  He  wandered  to  the  outskirts  of  the 
crowd  in  amazement  at  the  evidences  of  emotion  which 
met  him  at  every  step.  He  paused  at  length  by  the 
side  of  a  woman  who  was  weeping  piteously,  and  in- 
quired, "  My  good  woman,  what  are  you  crying  for  ?  " 
—  "  O  sir  !  for  the  parson's  sermon."  —  "  But  can  you 
hear  what  the  parson  is  saying?"  —  "No,  sir."  —  "Have 
you  heard  any  thing  since  he  began  ?  "  —  "  No,  sir."  — 
"  Pray  tell  me,  then,  what  for  do  you  cry  ?  "  —  "  O  sir ! 
don't  you  see  that  holy  wag  of  his  head  ?  " 

(3)  One  part  of  the  mission  of  the  pulpit,  therefore, 
must  be  to  divide  and  define  and^identify  religious 
thought  in  the  popular  experience.  Preaching  ought 
to  educate  the  religious  sensibilities  of  the  people,  as 
well  as  to  stimulate  them.  You  perform  a  work  of 
questionable  usefulness,  if  you  only  awaken  those  sen- 
sibilities, and  then  leave  them  to  take  care  of  them- 
selves. They  will  crystallize  about  something ;  and  if 
you  do  not  furnish  the  right  thing,  error,  weakness, 
depravity,  and  Satan  will  always  be  at  hand  with  the 
wrong  thing.  Preaching  ought  to  break  up  the  con- 
glomerate in  which  thought  and  feeling,  error  and 
truth,  spiritual  power  and  animal  magnetism,  divine 
suggestion  and  Satanic  temptation  lie  molten  together. 
Men  need  to  be  taught  by  the  pulpit  to  know  what 
they  believe,  and   why  they  feel,  what   emotions   are 


laOT.  xi.]  THE  PROPOSITION :    NECESSITY.  287 

legitimate  to  one  trutli,  and  what  to  another,  and  why 
they  differ.     Truths  need  to  be  indivirlnalizprl  bv  ana^-^ 

lytic  preaching. Only  thus  can  the  popular  experience 

of  them  be  deepened  by  discriminating  knowledge. 

It  deserves  to  be  noticed  here,  that,  in  our  own  day, 
there  is  comparatively  little  questioning  of  the  spirit 
of  revivals.  The  pulpit  commonly  welcomes  them,  and 
assumes  that  they  are  the  work  of  God.  To  doubt 
this,  and  to  express  that  doubt,  expose  a  pastor  to  sus- 
picion of  his  consecration  to  the  Lord's  work.  Some- 
times pastors  find  themselves  borne  along  by  a  tide  of 
popular  feeling,  of  the  purity  of  which  they  entertain 
serious  doubts.  They  see  evils  which  they  dare  not 
condemn,  lest  they  should  be  thought  to  be  opposers  of 
revivals  and  of  the  men  who  are  their  conspicuous 
leaders.  They  see  converts  but  half  converted,  men 
coming  into  the  Church  with  false  or  infirm  ideas  of  sin 
and  regeneration  and  atonement.  President  Edwards 
did  a  courageous  thing,  when,  as  an  antidote  to  the 
very  same  class  of  evils  which  we  often  witness,  he 
published  his  work  on  "The  Religious  Affections." 
When  has  a  similar  work  appeared  in  our  day?  Many 
pastors  who  have  attempted  to  apply  similar  correctives 
of  popular  excitement  from  their  pulpits  have  met  with 
the  rebukes  of  evangelists,  and  have  been  silenced  by 
their  misguided  people. 

It  is  one  of  the  perils  of  evangelism,  which  requires 
skill  and  courage  in  the  encounter,  that  the  conspicu- 
ous instruments  of  a  revival  originated  under  such  in- 
strti  mentalities  do  not  and  can  not  apply  the  educating 
influences  which  every  revival  creates  the  need  of.  I 
say  can  not,  because  the  educating  work  is  a  work  of 
time.  That  work  is  turned  over  to  the  hands  of  pas- 
tors :  it  is  a  work  not  of  stimulati^^n,  but  of  discipline ; 


6 


288  TICB  THEORY  OF  PREACHINQ  [user,  xn 

not  of  emotion,  but  chiefly  of  instruction,  —  a  work 
unsupported  by  the  sympathy  of  large  assemblies,  the 
novelty  o^  strange  voices,  and  the  ^clat  of  special  meas- 
ures. Thus  it  often  subjects  pastors  to  the  severest 
trials  of  their  patience  and  their  faith.  Foresight  of 
this  after-work  following  a  religious  excitement  pro- 
duced by  other  agencies  than  that  of  the  settled  pastor 
should  always  be  taken  into  account  in  deciding  upon 
the  expediency  of  importing  evangelistic  labor  as  an 
aid  to  the  permanent  pulpit. 

Yet  very  many  of  the  dangers  of  this  class  may  be 
avoided,  or  at  least  safely  encountered,  if  the  work  oi 
the  permanent  pulpit  is  what  it  ought  to  be  in  point  of 
instructive  and  discriminate  preaching.  To  a  people 
thus  trained  under  an  educating  pulpit,  revivals  oi 
religion  may  come  and  go  as  the  most  natural  process 
of  religious  experience,  creating  no  morbid  excitement, 
and  leaving  behind  them  no  perils  to  be  feared,  and 
no  evils  to  be  corrected.  They  may  be  as  natural  as 
the  tides,  —  themselves  a  purifying  agency,  instead  of 
needing,  as  actual  revivals  often  do,  to  be  themselves 
purified.  To  a  people  educated  by  such  a  ministry, 
evangelists  may  come  and  go  as  auxiliaries,  instead  of 
revolutionists. 

6th,  Returning,  now,  to  the  question  of  rhetorical 
form  immediately  before  us,  I  remark  witli  emphasis, 
the  fact,  that,  to  achieve  this  education  of  a  people, 
preaching  must  use  freely  the  expedients  by  which  a 
logical  mind  naturally  makes  itself  understood  in  the 
expression  of  strong  thought  on  great  themes.  We 
must  generalize  less,  and  anal^'ze  more ;  exhort  less, 
and  argue  more.  We  must  divide  and  isolate,  and 
specify  and  concentrate  our  most  profound  conceptions 
of  elemental  truths.     That  kind  of  preaching  to  which 


LECT.  XX.]  THE  PROPOSITION :    NECESSITY.  289 

a  free  use  of  the  expedients  of  logical  expression  is  a 
necessity  is  the  only  preaching  by  which  the  pulpit  can 
accomplish  its  work  as  an  educating  power. 

Therefore  preach  very  little  in  the  general,  and  very 
much  in  the  detail.  Preach  little  on  truth,  and  mucli 
on  truths.  Preach  rarely  on  religion,  but  constantly  on 
the  facts,  the  doctrines,  the  duties,  the  precepts,  the 
privileges,  of  religion.  Divide,  discriminate,  define, 
sharpen,  clarify,  doctrine  by  doctrine,  duty  by  duty, 
fact  by  fact,  till  the  whole  map  of  Christian  faith  is 
outlined  and  clear.  You  thus  gain  the  power  of  pointed 
preaching.  Thought  will  take  the  precedence  of  feel- 
ing, and  intelligent  action  will  be  the  resultant  of  both. 
The  final  product  which  you  accumulate  and  build 
up  will  be  not  beliefs  alone,  not  sensibilities  alone,  but 
character  in  those  forms  in  which  character  is  power. 
Your  church  will  become  to  the  religious  world  what 
any  other  body  of  men  of  character  is  to  the  secular 
world,  —  a  consolidation  of  forces,  and  a  power  of  con- 
trol. 

7th,  The  use  of  that  class  of  expedients  to  which 
definite  propositions  belong,  and  of  that  kind  of  preach- 
ing to  which  they  are  a  necessity,  tends  to  form  and, 
consolidate  the_thgalogica,1.,^th  of  a  people.  This  il- 
lustrates in  another  aspect  what  I  mean  in  saying,  that, 
in  some  relations  of  it,  the  question  ceases  to  be  one  of 
forms,  and  becomes  one  of  things.  Dr.  Lyman  Beecher 
accomplished  more  for  the  evangelical  faith  in  Boston 
by  his  bony  sermons  than  by  all  other  expedients  of 
his  pulpit.  They  were  not  graceful  discourses;  tl.ey 
were  not  literary  discourses  ;  they  were  not  classically 
finished  discourses  (they  would  have  been  improved 
if  they  had  been  all  these);  but  they  were  definite 
discourses.     They  reined  up  hearers  to  specific  think 


? 


/..^-^t^^J-K— ^  fi^'^ 


\ 


290  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lbct.  x* 

ing.  They  made  them  see  that  the  preacher  was  aim 
:ng  at  something.  It  was  impossible  to  mistake  what 
and  where  the  target  was.  In  this  respect  his  sermons 
were  in  striking  contrast  with  those  of  his  opponents, 
whose  antipathy  to  an  angular  theology  expressed  itself 
in  smooth  and  rounded  rhetoric,  which  presented  to  the 
popular  conscience,  no__  protuberances  ol_thought,  no 
points  of  convergent  force,  and  therefore  no  centers 
of  burning  power.  The  fruits  of  the  two  methods  of 
preaching  have  entered  into  the  history  of  New  Eng- 
land, and  are  known  and  read  of  all  men. 

The  question,  then,  of  the  formal  statement  of  the 
themes  and  the  salient  thoughts  of  sermons,  is  not  a 
question  of  taste  only.  Still  less  is  it  a  question  of 
forms  only.  It  affects  vitally  a  policy  of  thought ;  anc 
its  decision  is  an  index  of  a  policy  in  preaching,  upon 
which  success  depends.  To  achieve  that  success,  you 
must  have  constructive  methods;  for  constructive  meth- 
ods, you  must  have  a  positive  faith ;  and  for  a  positive 
faith,  you  must  have  centers  of  discussion  which  shall 
be  visible.  To  make  these  centers  visible,  you  must 
make  them  luminous ;  to  make  them  luminous,  you 
must  have  definite  statements  of  them  which  shall  pen- 
etrate the  understanding,  and  remain  in  the  memory. 
In  no  other  way  can  you  get  possession  of  available 
forces  with  which  to  work  upon  the  popular  life. 

All  this  comes  by  intuition  to  a  live  man  who  under- 
fitands  his  mission  in  the  pulpit.  Yet  even  such  a  man 
may  hang  a  mill-stone  around  his  own  neck  by  culti- 
vating an  antipathy  to  the  natural  forms  of  logic  in  the 
construction  of  discourses  for  the  pulpit.  By  banishing 
those  forms  from  his  sermons,  he  may  banish  the  things 
they  express ;  and  then  strong,  positive,  argumentative 
preaching  is  no  longer  possible.     This  is  one  of  the 


/V^vO 


k 


Xr^Q^J^Jr^"'-^ 


Ui 


i'P- 


LBOT.  XX.]  THE  PROPOSITION :    NECESSITY.  291 

things  of  which  jou  must  have  the  forms,  or,  in  the 
long  run,  you  can  not  have  the  things.  (^ 

8th,  Yet  the  best  analytic  methods  of  sermonizing  \ 
will  sometimes  fail  to  define  truth  in  the  popular  the  ^ 
ology.  The  perils  of  the  pulpit  in  this  respect  are 
nearly  all  on  one  side.  A  hundred  sermons  fall  still- 
born from  the  pulpit  because  of  their  pointless  struc- 
ture, where  one  repels  hearers  by  excess  of  angularity. 
That  is  sure  to  be  a  still-birth  which  produces  a  body 
without  vertehrce.  Life  must  have  an  osseous  frame- 
work. 

You  will  very  soon  begin  to  observe,  in  remarking 
the  effects  of  sermons  upon  your  audiences,  that  a 
structure  which  seems  needlessly  formal  to  you  often  \ 
is  not  so  to  them.  Not  only  will  you  discover  that  sub- 
jects which  you  have  tried  to  express  by  hint,  by  covert 
announcement,  by  silent  inference  from  a  text,  are  not 
detected  by  your  hearers ;  but  subjects  which  to  you 
are  as  positive  as  a  triangle  in  their  statements,  some 
of  your  hearers  will  misunderstand.  They  will  suppose 
you  to  be  preaching  on  the  omnipotence  of  God,  when, 
in  fact,  you  are  discoursing  upon  his  sovereignty. 
They  will  be  thinking  of  the  degree  of  depravity  while 
you  are  describing  its  extent.  You  will  preach  upon 
Christ's  work  of  intercession,  and  some  of  your  hearers 
will  advance  no  nearer  to  your  thought  than  to  imagine 
that  they  have  heard  a  sermon  on  prayer.  You  will 
be  praised  or  censured  for  sermons  which  you  never 
preached.  You  will  be  invited  to  repeat,  and  asked  to 
publish,  discourses  of  which  you  never  heard.  Some 
hearers  will  label  a  sermon  with  a  theme  derived  from 
a  single  division  of  it,  from  a  paragraph,  from  an  illus- 
tration, from  an  application. 

But  is  not  this  view  contradictory  to  an  opposite 


'-j^ 


tATv 


^i^       ^fr^^^..  "^"- 


^ 


292  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xx 

view,  whijh  has  been  as  positively  expressed?  I  affirm 
the  confusion  of  religious  ideas  among  the  people,  yet 
I  have  claimed  for  the  popular  mind  great  keenness 
of  intelligence.  Is  not  this  a  contradiction  ?  I  answer, 
No.  It  is  a  biace  of  opposites.  Any  practical  art. 
when  reduced  to  its  ultimate  facts,  must  involve  man}' 
such  paradoxes.  The  popidar  mind  is  both  intelligent 
and  ignorant.  The  same  individual  mind  may  be  be  th. 
The  masses  of  men  have  sagacity  without  culture. 
Whatever  intuition  can  teach  them,  they  see  with  the 
eye  of  an  eagle.  But  whatever  depends  on  mental 
training,  they  need  to  be  taught  line  upon  line,  precept 
upon  precept.  They  will  appreciate  keen  distinctions, 
if  you  once  make  those  distinctions  palpable.  Gain 
attention  to  them,  and  assent  is  swift.  But  the  multi 
tude  do  not  originate  distinctions  nicely.  Therefore 
they  need  statements  made  for  them,  and  so  made  as  to 
command  their  understanding. 

9th,  Looking,  now,  for  a  few  moments,  away  from  the 
pulpit,  we  discover  another  illustration  of  the  value  of 
definite  statements  of  themes,  and  of  the  style  of  think- 
ing which  such  statements  represent,  in  the  importance 
attached  to  them  in  other  departments  of  oratory.  Out 
of  the  pulpit  public  speaking  is  commonly  a  business. 
It  has  an  object  in  real  life.  Men  are  in  earnest  in  it. 
Speakers  speak  for  a  purpose :  hearers  hear  for  a  pur- 
pose. What,  then,  is  the  testimony  of  the  senate  and 
the  bar  on  the  question  of  the  necessity  of  propositions  ? 
Why  is  a  lawyer  expected  to  state  his  case  to  a  jury  ? 
Why  must  a  senator  speak  to  a  motion,  upon  a  resolu- 
tion, for  or  against  a  bill  ?  Why  is  legislative  business 
printed  and  circulated  before  it  passes  to  a  second 
reading?  These  expedients  of  legislative  and  forensic 
asage   are   among  the   equivalents  of  those   helps  to 


LECT.  XX.]  THE  PROPOSITION :    NECESSITY  293 

precision  which  a  preacher  seeks  in  choosing  texts,  and 
stating  themes,  and  announcing  divisions  of  sermons. 

The  ablest  forensic  orators  have  aimed  to  give  to  state- 
ments of  truth  the  force  of  arguments  for  those  truths. 
Said  the  chief  justice  of  New  Hampshire,  in  comment- 
ing upon  one  of  Daniel  Webster's  early  efforts,  "  That 
young  man's  statement  of  his  case  was  an  unanswerable 
argument  for  its  justice."     The  judge  bonowed   the 
criticism  from  Edmund  Burke,  who  had  said  the  same 
of  Lord  Mansfield.     The  main  force  of  Mansfield's  elo- 
quence lay  in  this,  —  his  power  to  pack  into  the  lucid- 
ness  of  a  statement  the  weight  of  invincible  logic.     The 
consequence  was  that  the  House  of  Lords  paid  greater 
deference  to  his  speeches  than  to  those  of  any  other 
man  in  England.     From  Mansfield,  Chief  Justice  Mar- 
shall derived  the  same  taste  for  elaborated  and  finished 
statements.     Says  one  critic,  "Marshall's  force  lay  in  \ 
three    things:   first,  he  understood   his  own   purpose      V 
secondly,  he  so  stated  it  as  to  make  a  jury  understand     / 
it ;  thirdly,  he  so  stated  it  as  to  make  them  feel  that    ( 
neitLer  they  nor  he  had  any  concern  with  any  thing     \ 
else.     For   the    time,   the    opposition   was    nowhere."     J 
This   criticism   suggests   an   admirable  model  for  the 
statements  of  the  themes  of  sermons. 

Look  over  the  ranks  of  eminent  legal  minds,  and  you 
will  observe,  that,  almost  without  exception,  those  who 
command  the  position  they  hold,  and  hold  the  position 
they  choose,  are  men  of  this  type  of  intellectual  force. 
Their  productions  when  analyzed  exhibit  a  polished 
compactness  in  the  expression  of  vital  truths  which 
gives  to  mere  statement  literally  the  force  of  a  syllo- 
gism. Their  propositions  are  proofs.  They  prepossess 
conviction.  We  accept  the  statement,  and  say,  "  What 
is  there  here  to  argue  about?  " 


i94  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  Flect.  xx 

A  notable  instance  of  this  axiomatic  style  of  state- 
ment, which  carries  its  demonstration  on  the  face  of  it, 
IS  found  in  the  title  of  Dr.  Bushnell's  work  on  female 
suffrage,  "  The  Reform  against  Nature."  Nothing  else 
could  be  so  perfect,  nothing  else  so  unanswerable. 
The  verbiage  and  the  sophistry  with  which  the  press 
is  deluged  on  that  subject  are  rebuffed  by  that  com- 
pression of  the  whole  case  into  one  idea  in  four  words. 
We  speak  of  truth  in  a  nutshell:  this  is  truth  in  a 
bombshell.  Such  a  proposition  is  worth  any  volume 
which  can  be  written  on  the  subject.  Half  the  work  of 
constructing  the  book  was  finished  in  the  invention  of 
the  title. 

'  For  the  reasons  which  have  now  been  given,  the 
principle,  I  think,  will  be  admitted,  that  a  proposition, 
and  a  proposition  studied,  and  a  .proposition  stated,  and 
often  a  proposition  finished  in  elaborate  and  compact 
form,  is  a  very  vital  part  of  pulpit  discourse.  Though 
but  a  fragment  in  form,  it  is  an  index  to  the  whole 
style  of  thinking  which  underlies  the  form.     Without 

\it,  the  most  valuable  style  of  thinking  is  impracticable 
in  the  pulpit ;  and  with  it,  all  styles  may  be  at  com 
mand. 


..-U 


LECTURE   XXI. 

THE  PROPOSITION:   NECESSITY,   SUBSTANOB. 

II.  The  views  thus  far  presented  suggest  the  furthei 
inquiry,  in  the  second "  place.  Does  the  necessity  of  a 
proposition  in  a  sermon  admit  of  exceptions? 

1st,  In  answer  let  it  be  observed  that  some  apparent 
exceptions  are  not  real  exceptions.  Apparent  excep- 
tions occur  in  such  cases  as  the  following.  One  is 
where  the  theme  of  a  sermon  is  naturally  inferred  from 
the  occasion.  A  biographical  discourse  at  a  funeral 
may  not  require  distinct  announcement  of  its  subject. 
Why  ?  Because  the  audience  already  know  what  must 
be  the  center  of  thought  in  the  sermon.  The  occasion 
is  the  proposition.  There  is  an  apparent  exception 
where  a  sjiibject  of  discourse  has  been  announced  by 
previous  notice.  An  advertisement  in  a  newspaper,  or 
an  announcement  from  the  pulpit,  may  have  anticipated 
the  work  of  a  proposition  ;  so  that  to  announce  the 
theme  may  be  unnaturally  formal.  Why?  Only  be- 
cause  such  announcement  would  be  a  repetition  where 
repetition  is  needless.  A  textual  or  an  expository  ser 
mon  may  not  need  a  distinct  declaration  that  the  text 
is  the  theme.  Why?  Because  the  explanation  of  the 
text  may  be  so  constructed  that  it  shall  be  impossible 
for  a  hearer  not  to  understand  that  the  text  is  the  cen- 
ter of  interest.     In  a  series  of  expository  discourses, 


/- 


296  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xxi 

formal  statement  of  subject  may  be  needless  after  the 
first  discourse.  Why  ?  Because  that  first  of  the  seriej? 
has  informed  the  audience,  both  of  the  subjects  and  of 
the  method  of  discussion  in  the  subsequent  sermons. 

These,  you  will  perceive,  are  not  real  exceptions  to 
the  principle  we  have  considered.  But  a  clasc  of  dis- 
courses exist  which  are  distinct  from  these,  and  which 
seem  to  involve  the  omission  of  a  proposition.  Yoj 
say,  and  not  unreasonably,  "  I  do  not  wish  always  to 
disclose  my  object  in  a  sermon  till  I  reach  its  applica- 
tion to  my  hearers.  How  can  I  thus  advance  to  my 
object  under  cover,  if  I  must  reveal  every  thing  in  a 
formal  proposition?  I  must  sometimes  catch  hearers 
with  guile." 

2d,  This  suggests  the  inquiry.  Shall  a  proposition 
be  omitted  for  the  sake  of  politic  concealment  of  the 
aim  of  a  sermon  ?    In  answer  let  several  facts  be  noted. 

(1)  In  the  first  place,  rhetorical  concealment  in  the 
pulpit  is  itself  exceptional.  Preaching  may,  by  the 
truthfulness  of  its  character,  venture  upon  an  openness 
of  policy  which  would  not  be  wisdom  of  policy  else- 
where. Diplomatic  reserve  of  truth  is  the  exception, 
not  the  rule,  in  the  discourses  of  the  pulpit.  If  it 
become  the  favorite  art  of  a  preacher,  people  distrust 
it,  and  are  repelled.  Dr.  Emmons  suffered  in  the  esti- 
mation of  some  of  his  hearers  by  his  fondness  for  con- 
cealed conclusions.  The  springing  of  a  mine  was  his 
favorite  symbol  of  the  application  of  a  sermon.  His 
hearers  used  to  say,  "  Beware  of  conceding  the  doctor's 
premises:  nobody  but  he  knows  where  he  will  lead  3^0 u 
in  the  end."  A  Machiavellian  reputation  is  not  a  desira< 
ble  one  in  the  pulpit.  We  want  a  docile,  not  a  suspi- 
cious hearing.  If,  therefore,  exception  be  made  to  the 
rule  requiring  a  statement  of  proposition  in  a  sermon 


LBOT.  XXI.]        THE  PROPOSITION :    NECESSITY.  297 

as   an   expedient   of  rhetorical   policy,  that  exception 
should  itself  be  rare. 

(2)  Concealment  of  an  aim  at  the  intellect  of  hearera 
is  widely  different  from  concealment  of  an  appeal  to 
their  sensibilities.  In  the  nature  of  the  case,  and  there- 
fore always,  it  is  unphilosophical  to  announce  an  inten 
tion  of  appeal  to  the  feelmgs.  It  is  not  in  the  nature 
of  the  case,  and  therefore  it  may  never  be  as  unphilo- 
sophical, to  announce  a  design  upon  the  convictions  of 
men.  Imagine  a  speaker,  in  the  pulpit  or  out  of  it, 
saying  to  you,  "  Come  now,  I  am  about  to  excite  your 
emotions :  smile,  weep,  pity,  fear,  mourn,  rejoice,  with 
me."  Imagine  another  saying,  "Come,  now,  let  us 
reason  together.  I  wish  to  convince  you :  I  propose  to 
address  your  sober  judgment:  I  ask  you  to  hear  my 
arguments :  I  hope  to  show  you  the  truth  of  my  con- 
clusion." Is  there  no  distinction  between  these  two 
disclosures  of  rhetorical  intent  ?  Are  we  not  repulsed 
by  the  one,  when  we  should  be  attracted  by  the  other  ? 
The  one  is  a  burlesque  of  oratory :  the  other  may  be 
its  triumph. 

The  preacher  may  offend  hearers  by  arrogance  of 
manner  in  revealing  the  purpose  to  address  their  intel- 
icct.  Said  Luther,  "I  shall  prove  this  doctrine  so 
unanswerably,  that  any  one  of  you  who  does  not  believe 
it  will  be  damned."  The  repulsion  here  is  caused  by 
the  dogmatic  manner,  not  by  the  fact  of  disclosure. 
Intellect  courts  visible  approach:  sensibility  evades  " 
such  approach.  Intellect  is  bold,  and  craves  bold  treat- 
ment. Sensibility  is  coy,  and  hides  itself:  it  would  be 
secretly  won.  This  is  human  nature.  We  should 
Jever,  therefore,  carry  over  into  the  policy  of  treating 
the  understanding  the  reserve  which  trTie  policy  re- 
quires in  the  treatment  of  the  feelings.     Each  should 


^ 


:i98  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHTNa.  [leot.  m 

be  managed  according  to  its  kind.  A  proposition  for 
the  intellect  may  be  even  the  more  necessary,  because 
of  a  reserved  aim  at  the  sensibilities. 

(3)  Therefore  the  omission  of  all  forms  of  proposi- 
tion is  not  necessary,  even  when  the  application  is  con- 
cealed till  the  end.  A  proposition  may  involve  youi 
conclusion  without  stating  it.  Your  proposition  may 
announce  a  theme  in  the  general :  your  conclusion  may 
disclose  a  specific  truth  on  that  theme.  Your  proposi- 
tion may  be  an  interrogative :  your  conclusion  may  be 
its  answer.  Your  proposition  may  ask  attention  to 
some  thoughts  suggested  by  the  text :  your  conclusion 
may  educe  results  which  the  hearers  would  not  have 
tolerated  at  the  outset. 

Note  a  single  illustration  of  one  of  these  methods  in 
which  concealment  is  wisely  practiced,  yet  in  which 
a  definite  proposition  is  stated  and  held  as  a  center 
of  interest.  The  doctrine  of  eternal  punishment  is 
unpopular,  we  may  suppose,  among  your  hearers.  You 
wish  to  preach  it,  yet  would  not  arouse  their  prejudices 
needlessly.  You  therefore  approach  it  gradually  by 
a  discussion  which  covers  it  from  sight  till  your  con- 
clusion reveals  it  behind  impregnable  defenses.  Must 
you  withhold  a  proposition  in  order  to  do  this  ?  By  no 
means.  Adopt  the  text,  "  Are  not  my  ways  equal  ?  " 
Announce  as  your  proposition  this,  to  consider  some 
illustrations  of  the  reasonableness  of  God's  ways  with 
men  in  certain  things  of  which  men  often  complain. 
This  is  a  harmless  statement,  offensive  to  none,  yet 
sufficiently  definite  to  give  to  the  intellect  of  hearers 
a  center  of  attention  and  interest.  You  proceed  to 
develop  it  by  a  cumulative  series  of  remarks.  You 
observe:  1.  That  God  is  reasonable  in  creating  man 
without  giving  him  a  choice  as  to  his  own  existence 


^*  (k  Lm^   ^^' 


rr«^    t>«^^  (t^--*ve   (  *^^U^^ 

LiiCT   ixi.l         THE  PROPOSITION:    NECESSITY.  299 

2.  That  God  is  reasonable  in  subjecting  man  to  a  gov- 
ernment of  law ;  3.  That  God  is  reasonable  in  placing 
man  on  probation  under  law ;  4.  That  God  is  reasona- 
ble in  sustaining  law  by  adequate  sanction  of  which  he 
only  is  the  proper  judge ;  5.  That  God  is  reasonable  in 
the  reprieve  of  violators  of  law  by  a  scheme  of  grace, 
of  wliich,  also,  he  alone  can  intelligently  judge  ;  6.  That 
God  is  reasonable  in  executing  the  sanctions  of  law 
against  transgressors;  7.  Especially  is  God  reasonable 
in  the  punishment  of  sinners  who  ha^^e  violated  both 
law  and  grace. 

In   a  cumulative  discourse  of  this  kind,  your  final 
object  is  reached  by  a  gradual  approach,  which  may  be 
made  to  cover  the  whole  of  the  popular  objection  to  the 
doctrine  of  retribution.    Yet  a  proposition  is  announced 
which  conceals  that  final  object  till  you  are  prepared 
to  declare  it  advantageously.     True,  the  proposition  is 
not  the  most  specific  conceivable  ;  but  it  is  sufficiently      \ 
so  to  aiiswer  the  hearer's  natural  and  irrepressible  crav-      1/ 
ing  for  a  center  of  attention,  and  to  be  a  protection     / 
against   rambling   thought.     I  repeat,  therefore,  it  is 
not  necessary  to  a  politic  concealment  of  the  aim  of  a 
sermon  that  all  form  of  proposition  be  withheld. 

(4)  To  withhold  all  form  of  proposition  is  an  impedi- 
ment to  the  policy  of  concealment.  To  withhold  a 
proposition  implies  an  obvious  concealment.  The  fact 
of  concealment  in  discourse  is  a  stroke  of  art.  A 
disclosure  of  the  fact  that  the  drift  of  a  discourse  is 
concealed  excites  distrust.  Our  minds  instinctively 
brace  themselves  against  a  hidden  purpose  on  the  part 
of  a  speaker,  if  the  hint  be  given  us  that  he  has  a 
hidden  purpose.  Therefore  the  perfection  of  art 
requires  that  the  policy  of  concealment  be  itself  coii«„  ~"  ^; 
sealed,  and  this  demands  that  some  form  of  propositi  n 


300  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xxi 

be  aniLounced  as  a  center  of  interest  to  the  mind  of  the 
hearer. 

III.  The  third  general  topic  in  the  discussion  of 
propositions  is  the  inquiry,  What  principles  should  regu- 
late the  substance  of  a  proposition  ?  The  substance  of 
a  proposition  may  be  regarded  in  three  relations,  —  the 
relation  of  its  elements  to  each  other,  the  relation  of 
the  whole  to  the  text,  and  the  relation  of  the  whole  to 
the  sermon. 
r|  1st,   The   elements   of   a  proposition   should   be   so 

related  to  each  other,  that  they  shall  be  susceptible  of 
unity  of  discussion.  No  art  requires  oneness  of  char- 
acter in  its  productions  more  imperatively  than  that  of 
oratorical  discourse.  A  good  discourse  is  a  structure, 
—  one  structure,  a  whole,  not  a  congeries  of  alien  par- 
ticles. 

(1)  A  sermon,  therefore,  comes  under  all  the  laws  of 
unity  which  regulate  discourse  in  other  forms.  As  we 
have  seen  that  nothing  is  a  sermon  which  is  not  a 
structure,  so  every  part  of  it,  if  perfectly  formed,  must 
be  constructed.  Every  part  gravitates  to  every  other 
part.  The  demand  for  this  grows  out  of  the  very 
nature  of  persuasive  speech,  and  is  inevitable  in  every 
mind.  The  demand  is  one  wliich  reason  always  makes 
upon  reason.  If  not,  why  should  incoherent  speech  be 
a  sign  of  delirium  ? 
/7  /  (2)  The  foundation  of  unity  of  discourse  must  be 
'^  '  laid  in^  unity  of  proposition.  The  parts  can  not  gravi- 
•  tate  towards  each  other  without  resultant  forces  which 
meet  in  a  center.  The  most  vigorous  elements  in  a 
sermon,  if  they  have  not  the  centripetal  attraction,  can 
only  jostle  and  defeat  each  other.  Thoughts  let  loose 
in  speech,  ani  left  there,  neutralize  each  other.  The 
more  powerful  they  are  individually,  the  weaker  they 


f'/ 


yu^t^lj:^  ^^^ 


ft-in^ 


4.ECT.  XXI.]       THE  PROPOSITION :    SUBSTANCE.  301 

are  as  a  whole.  The  more  intense  the  emotions  in 
which  they  are  draped,  the  more  frigid  is  their  effect 
upon  intelligent  purpose.  Of  such  purpose  they  have 
none.  They  can  move  a  hearer  only  to  a  state  of 
bewilderment. 

Hence  :t  is,  that,  in  the  history  of  the  pulpit,  those 
discourses  which  commonly  produce  epileptic  and  cata- 
leptic phenomena  in  the  audience  are  rambling  dis- 
courses. Thought  without  an  aim,  emotion  without  a 
purpose,  stimulation  of  the  sensibilities  without  intelli 
gent  gravitation  to  an  object  let  loose  upon  feeble 
minds  the  most  unmanageable  tendencies  to  pathologi- 
cal distortion.  A  center  of  thought  rigidly  adhered 
to,  even  in  the  wildest  of  ranting  discourse,  would  tend 
to  preserve  the  mental  balance  of  hearers  by  the  mere 
conservatism  of  intellect  in  its  control  of  feeling. 
Animal  sensibilities  can  scarcely  master  a  mind  which 
IS  thinking  intensely  and  consecutively  to  one  point. 
Such  a  singleness  of  point  in  discourse  is  gained  by  a 
proposition.  The  first  constructive  idea  we  can  form  of 
a  discourse  must  be  an  idea  of  its  proposition,  and  that, 
as  Vinet  remarks,  we  always  assume  to  have  been  one, 
and  but  one.  We  never  ask  what  were  the  subjects. 
We  assume  unity,  never  plurality,  unless  we  mean  to 
burlesque  a  rambling  speaker.  The  reason  is  that 
nature  prompts  us  to  seek  the  germ  of  a  discourse  in 
its  proposition.  ('  F^nelon  only  expresses  the  same  truth 
in  another  form',  when  he  says,  ''  The  discourse  is  the 
proposition  unfolded,  and  the  proposition  is  the  dis- 
course condensed." 

Another  phenomenon  which  deserves  notice  is  that,  if 
the  discourse  has  no  unity  of  theme,  a  good  hearer 
instinctively  struggles  to  create  it  and  insert  it  as  the 
discourse  proceeds.     Something  he  must  have  to  put 


;. 


302  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xxi. 

andei  the  superstructure,  and  support  its  weight  by 
some  sort  of  logical  form.  We  observe,  therefore,  one 
of  the  axioms  of  homiletics  in  the  fact  before  us,  —  that 
the  elements  of  a  proposition  must  be  so  related  to 
each  other  as  to  be  susceptible  of  unity  of  discussion. 
A  sermon  may  be  devoid  of  unity,  if  a  proposition  is 
not ;  but  it  surely  will  be  devoid  of  unity,  if  the  propo- 
sition is. 

(3)  The  inquiry  arises  here.  Does  not  this  requisi- 
tion of  unity  of  proposition  restrict  freedom  of  dis- 
course? Not  at  all;  for  unity  of  proposition  admits 
of  every  variety  of  discourse  which  has  an  object.  It 
restrains  only  discourse  at  random.  In  illustration  of 
this  we  must  observe  that  unity  itself  admits  of  great 
diversity  of  kind.  Vinet  specifies  twelve  varieties  of 
unity,  giving  rise  to  as  many  kinds  of  consecutive  and 
intelligent  discourse.  The  whole  subject  of  unity  is 
simplified  by  recalling  the  four  radical  varieties  of  com- 
position by  which  we  have  classified  sermons.  E:^£lana- 
tion,  proof,  illustration,  persuasion,  —  this  enumeration 
is  "exhaustive.  Xpreacher  who  speaks  with  an  object 
must  do  one  or  more  of  these  four  things,  and  only 
these.  Observe,  then,  how  the  subject  of  unity  in 
preaching  clarifies  itself  by  adjustment  to  these  radical 
diversities  of  composition.  From  the  nature  of  the 
case,  there  must  be  four  fundamental  varieties  of  unity 
in  discourse,  and  therefore  in  propositions;  and  there 
can  be  no  more.     Let  us  note  these  varieties. 

First,  a  proposition  may  admit  of  a  logical  unity  of 
discourse.  It  may  suggest  a  process  of  argument ;  and 
the  discourse,  if  true  to  its  object,  will  be  an  argumenta- 
tive production.  Its  aim  will  be  to  prove  one  thing, 
But  this  logical  unity  is  susceptible  of  very  great  di 
versity.     One  variety  is  that  in  which  the  object  of 


LECT.  XXI.]       THE  PROPOSITION :    SUBSTANCE.  303 

discourse  is  to  consider  the  objections  to  a  doctrine. 
Another  variety  is  that  in  which  a  truth  is  proved,  and 
inferences  from  it  are  considered.  Again  :  unity  of  logi- 
cal aim  may  be  consistent  with  a  consideration  of  truths 
mutually  related.  Still  further :  logical  unity  admits  oi 
a  combination  of  truth  with  other  processes  as  subordi- 
nates. Explanation  may  be  a  preliminary  to  the  pi  oof 
of  a  doctrine.  The  complications  are  innumerable  in 
which  a  logical  unity  inheres  in  great  diversity ;  yet 
in  the  proposition  itself  we  detect  perfect  unity  of  aim. 

Secondly,  a  proposition  may  be  adjusted  to  a  didactic 
unity  of  discourse.  The  aim  of  a  discourse  being  ex- 
planatiop,  not  proof,  that  aim  may  be  single ;  and,  IT 
the  sermon  obeys  it,  a  perfect  oneness  will  result  in  the 
whole  structure.  This  didactic  unity  also  may  be  unim- 
paired by  variety  in  the  elements  of  the  proposition. 
Jeremy  Taylor  discourses  upon  "  growth  in  grace,  with 
its  proper  instruments  and  signs."  Here  one  thing  is- 
treated  in  certain  relations,  and  these  relations  intro- 
duce variety.  Unity  of  aim  is  not  impaired  by  plurality 
of  elements.  Again  :  the  didactic,  like  the  logical  unity 
admits  of  the  combination  of  topics  mutually  related. 
Bourdaloue  preached  upon  "  the  severity  and  mildness 
of  Christian  law."  This  is  a  dual  proposition,  but  dual 
only  in  form.  Each  of  the  two  elements  is  the  comple- 
ment of  the  other,  and  therein  consists  the  unity  of 
theme.  The  didactic  even  exceeds  the  logical  unity  in 
the  freedom  it  gives  to  the  range  of  discourse.  It  ad- 
mits of  a  union,  in  one  proposition,  of  contrasted  truths. 
IMassillon  treats  in  one  sermon  "  the  death  of  the  sinner 
and  the  death  of  the  righteous."  Jeremy  Taylor  yokes 
into  one  proposition  '^ukewarmness  and  zeal."  Anti- 
thetical propositions  may  be  the  most  compact  units. 
Antithesis  is  often  intense  in  the  singleness  of  its  im- 


304  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [leot.  xh 

pression.  Lightning  is  never  at  other  times  so  vivid  as 
at  midnight.  Didactic  unity  without  losing  itself  may 
subside  into  a  textual  unity.  The  singleness  of  a  ser- 
mon must  often  consist  in  the  preacher's  fidelity  to  one 
text.  For  the  inspired  thought,  either  in  its  elements 
or  its  order,  he  is  not  responsible.  A  discourse  is  one 
if  it  develops  fully  the  force  of  one  text,  and  no  more. 
Therefore  a  proposition  is  one,  if  it  invites  attention 
X)  the  teachings  of  one  text. 

Thirdly,  a  proposition  may  be  fitted  to  a  picturesque 
unity  of  discourse.  Did  you  never  listen  to  a  sermon 
of  which  the  details  would  appear  to  a  superficial  criti- 
cism to  be  chaotic  in  their  confusion,  but  which  still 
left  upon  your  mind  a  burning  impression  of  one  thing? 
Did  it  explain  any  thing  ?  No.  Did  it  prove  any  thing  ? 
No.  But  did  it  not  intensify  something  ?  Was  not  the 
last  charge  you  could  bring  against  it  that  of  talk  at 
random?  The  sermon  was  illustrative.  But  what  kind 
of  unity  had  it,  or  could  it  have  ?  Precisely  the  unity 
of  a  good  painting.  As  in  a  painting  variety  of  per- 
sonage may  exist,  and  lights  and  shadows,  diversities 
of  form  and  feature  and  drapery  and  attitude,  even  con- 
trasts of  coloring  and  expression  and  character,  yet  all 
may  be  grouped  so  as  to  be  vividly  one  in  design  and 
in  effect,  so  an  illustrative  sermon  may  admit  of  infi- 
nitely varied  details  with  no  loss  of  a  genuine  unity. 
It  is  not  the  unity  of  a  dialectic  or  a  didactic  aim ;  but 
for  immediate  impression,  especially  upon  the  popular 
mind,  it  may  be  more  intense  than  either.  The  effect 
may  be  like  vision.  The  unpretending  proposition  may 
b^to  the  Shearing  of  the  sermon  what  the  optic  nerve  is 
to  the  brain. 

Examples  of  this  kind  of  unity  are  found  in  Jeremy 
Taylor's  discourse  on  the  "  Apples  of  Sodom,"  and  again 


LKCT.  XXI.]       THE  PROPOSITION :    SUBSTANCE  30i) 

on  ''  Doomsday-book,"  and  in  Professor  Park's  discourse 
on  "  the  character  of  Judas,"  and  again  on  "  the  charac- 
ter of  Peter."  Such  sermons  are  pictures.  We  must 
look  for  the  point  of  unity  in  them,  as  we  look  for 
the  intierpretation  of  a  painting.  Our  eye  must  be 
adjusted  to  the  right  focus.  We  must  judge  as  of 
perspective.  Very  many  sermons  which  a  mincing 
critic  would  condemn  find  the  key  to  their  structure 
in  the  single  fact  that  they  are  rhetorical  paintings. 
Their  unity  is  aesthetic.  It  may  be  rather  suggested 
than  defined  by  very  simple  forms  of  proposition. 

This  picturesque  unity  of  discourse,  like  the  other 
forms  of  unity  which  have  been  named,  is  susceptible 
of  variety  in  unity.  Even  the  proposition  of  such  a 
discourse  may  suggest  such  variety.  Rev.  Albert  Barnes 
once  preached  on  the  "Life  and  Times  of  Isaiah." 
The  unity  of  the  structure  was  not  impaired  by  repre- 
senting the  prophet  thus  as  the  central  figure  to  be  illus- 
trated by  his  surroundings.  Even  contrast  may  be 
contained  and  expressed  in  such  a  proposition  without 
loss  to  its  unity.  A  discourse  was  once  delivered  on  "  a 
comparison  of  St.  John  in  the  Isle  of  Patmos,  and 
Napoleon  at  St.  Helena."  The  sermon  was  a  series  of 
contrasts  between  the  two  exiles,  of  which  the  propo- 
sition gave  an  unmistakable  hint.  True,  the  statement 
of  the  theme  of  a  picturesque  discourse  does  not  admit 
of  as  great  variety  in  unity  as  that  of  a  didactic  or  an 
argumentative  sermon;  but  the  difference  is  in  state- 
ment only,  not  in  the  substance  of  the  theme.  All 
picturesque  art  is  made  up  of  hints  of  truth.  More  is 
meant  than  words  define.  It  is  not  unbecoming,  there- 
fore, if  the  proposition  of  a  picturesque  discourse  par- 
takes of  the  same  fragmentary  character. 

Fourthly,  a  proposition  may  be  adjusted  to  a  purely 


806  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.  [lbct.  xxi 

oratorical  unity  of  discourse.  "  The  practice  of  religion 
enforced  by  reason  "  is  the  theme  of  one  of  Dr.  South's 
sermons.  What  is  the  point  of  unity  in  this  ?  Argu- 
ment, explanation,  illustration  are  found  in  the  sermon, 
but  as  subordinate  elements  only.  They  do  not  ex- 
press the  aim  of  the  sermon.  Yet  that  is  expressed 
in  the  proposition.  The  object  is  direct  persuasion  to 
a  religious  life.  This  is  a  purely  oratorical  aim.  This 
kind  of  unity  characterizes  a  very  large  class  of  dis- 
courses in  the  practice  of  the  pulpit. 

These  four  radical  varieties  of  unity  —  the  logical, 
the  didactic,  the  picturesque,  and  the  oratorical  —  are 
exhaustive  of  the  analysis  of  unity  in  discourse.  From 
the  nature  of  rhetorical  composition,  it  follows  that  these 
are  the  fundamental  varieties,  and  that  there  can  be  no 
more.  The  entire  question  of  unity  of  discourse,  which 
often  seems  blindfold  in  rhetorical  discussion,  may  be, 
in  an}  case,  determined  by  bringing  the  discourse  to 
the  test  of  the  inquiry.  Can  its  materials  be  all  brought 
under  the  cover  of  a  proposition,  which,  in  any  of 
these  senses  of  the  term,  is  one  ?  On  the  other  hand, 
the  unity  of  a  proposition  may,  in  any  case,  be  tested 
by  the  inquiry.  Does  it  admit  of  a  discussion  which 
shall  be,  in  any  of  these  senses,  one  ?  All  the  freedom 
of  range  in  discussion  which  is  possible  in  speaking  to 
a  purpose  may  be  illustrated  in  sermons  constructed 
upon  these  models  of  oneness  in  proposition. 

But  it  is  often  said,  and  truly,  that  all  the  materials 
of  a  sermon  can  not  always  be  brought  within  the  range 
of  a  unique  proposition.  A  certain  class  of  evangelists 
are  never  weary  of  decrying  the  scholastic  training  for 
the  pulpit,  because  they  claim  that  it  binds  the  preacher 
by  rules  of  unity  which  hamper  freedom.  "  I  want  to 
let  my  tongue  loos(  m  preaching,"  says  one  of  this  clasa 


E.KCT    XXI.]        THE  PROPOSITION:    SUBSTANCE.  307 

of  divines,  "  and  say  what  comes  to  me :  I  muut  uttei 
whatever  the  Holy  Ghost  shall  put  into  my  mouth." 

(^4)  This  leads  us  to  observe  that  the  great  excellence 
of  the  scholastic  requisition  of  unity  in  a  proposition 
is  that  it  does  restrain  heterogeneous  discourse.  That 
which  "  comes  to  me  "  should  not  be  uttered,  if  it  is 
nothing  to  the  purpose.  The  Holy  Spirit  is  the  author 
of  order,  not  of  confusion.  He  no  more  prompts  to 
disorderly,  inconsecutive  discourse,  than  he  prompts  to 
raving.  If  a  preacher's  materials  can  not  be  built  into 
one  kind  of  structure,  for  one  purpose,  they  ought  not 
to  be  thrust  together  at  one  delivery.  Piling  such 
materials  in  layers,  and  capping  them  with  a  text,  and 
adding  the  appendage  of  an  exhortation,  does  not  make 
a  sermon  of  them. 

A  preacher  at  court  in  the  time  of  the  Stuarts  once 
proposed  to  consider  as  the  theme  of  his  sermon  three 
things :  "  First,  the  justice  of  God ;  secondly,  the  mercy 
of  God ;  thirdly,  that  the  actions  of  princes  are  not  to 
be  inquired  into."  Here  is  juxtaposition  of  materials, 
but  no  possible  unity.  What  one  proposition  could 
cover  them  ?  what  one  text  ?  what  one  aim  of  applica- 
tory  discourse?  It  is  an  admirable  test  of  the  mate- 
rials gathered  for  a  projected  sermon,  to  inquire.  Can 
they  all  be  compressed  under  the  shelter  of  a  proposi- 
tion which  shall  have  unity  of  substance  ?  If  not,  they 
will  make  but  a  rambling  or  disjointed  sermon.  Like 
will  produce  its  like.  The  unity  of  a  sermon  is  to  be 
provided  for  chiefly  in  the  proposition.  "  Do  not  dis- 
turb the  unity  of  military  thought  in  Italy.  One  bad 
general  is  better  than  two  good  ones ;  "  —  so  wrote  Napo- 
leon to  the  French  Directory.  The  art  of  discourse 
requires  that  which  is  equivalent  to  unity  of  command 
in  a  campaign ;  that  is,  oneness  of  proposition. 


% 


808  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lkot.  rxi 

2d,  Having  thus  regarded  the  elements  of  a  propo 
sition  in  their  relations  to  each  other,  it  would  be  in 
place  now  to  consider  them  in  their  relation,  as  a 
whole,  to  the  text,  observing  as  a  second  principle 
respecting  the  substance  of  the  proposition,  that  it 
should  be  congruous  with  the  text.  It  is  an  excellence 
peculiar  to  the  themes  of  the  pulpit,  that  they  can  be 
formed  in  keeping  with  inspired  authorities.  Proposi- 
tion and  text  should  sustain  each  other.  If  the  propo- 
sition is  the  trunk  from  which  the  body  of  the  sermon 
expands  itself,  the  text  is  the  root  from  which,  in  some 
sense,  the  proposition  should  grow.  To  avoid  repeti- 
tion, I  refer  you  here  to  the  discussion  which  we  have 
already  presented  of  the  pertinency  of  the  text.  In 
the  treatment  of  that  theme  the  topic  of  congruity 
between  text  and  proposition  was  sufficiently  consid- 
ered. 


•    •■;/ 


LECTURE  XXn. 

THE   PROPOSITION:   SUBSTANCE. 

3d,  We  pass  now  to  the  relation  of  a  proposition  as  a 
whole  to  the  body  of  the  sermon ;  observing  as  a  third 
principle  respecting  the  substance  of  the  proposition, 
that  it  should  be  identical  with  the  body  of  the  sermon. 

(1)  A  proposition  should  not  comprise  more  mate- 
rial than  can  be  impressively  discussed  in  one  sermon. 
The  necessity  of  this  caution  will  be  seen  from  remark- 
ing, in  the  first  place,  the  tendency  of  imperfectly 
disciplined  minds  to  indulge  in  excessive  latitude  of 
subject.  What  is  the  result  of  such  excessive  proposi- 
tions ?  Usually  the  discussion  falls  short  of  the  propo- 
sition. Sometimes,  however,  the  sermon  is  sacrificed 
to  the  preacher's  strain  to  equal  his  proposition.  It 
ceases  to  be  a  discourse :  it  becomes  an  abstract  of  a 
discourse.  Elaborate  it  may  be,  but  as  a  table  of 
contents  is  elaborate.  Arguments  are  stated  which 
there  is  no  time  to  amplify.  Facts  are  affirmed  which 
there  is  no  room  to  prove  ;  or  proved,  which  there  is  no 
space  to  illuytrate.  Conclusions  are  reached  logically 
which  the  bulk  of  the  structure  will  not  suffer  to  be 
impressed  by  any  natural  method  of  application.  Infer- 
ences are  named  of  which  even  the  logical  accuracy  is 
not  made  obvious.  The  structure  is  not  discourse :  it 
is  only  a  mammoth  skeleton  of  discourse.    Like  Bun 


310  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.         [us^rr.  xia 

yan's  Apollyon,  it  "  straddles  over  the  whole  breadth 
of  the  way." 

In  other  cases,  the  result  of  excessive  latitude  ol 
theme  is  the  sacrifice  of  the  vitality  of  the  sermon  by 
commonplace  in  details.  Generalities  in  thought  natu- 
rally take  on  hackneyed  forms  in  style.  These  flow  ki 
monotonous  succession,  like  the  fall  of  a  mill-stream. 
Weigh  them  down  with  a  sjnnpathetic  delivery,  and 
you  will  have  the  clerical  humdrum  in  comical  perfec- 
tion. Hence  have  arisen  dull,  ponderous,  indolent, 
corpulent  bodies  of  divinity  in  sermons,  which  remind 
one  of  a  child's  first  attempts  at  composition  on  duty, 
friendship,  truth,  education,  industry,  time,  eternity. 
Such  discourses  are  not  necessarily  an  indication  of  a 
feeble  or  inactive  intellect.  They  betoken  only  a  mis- 
take in  rhetorical  policy.  The  most  mercurial  minds 
may  be  cheated  of  all  their  originality  of  invention  by 
the  selection  of  one  of  these  oceanic  themes. 

This  leads  us  to  observe,  further,  that  restriction 
of  subject  assists  the  invention  of  original  materials. 
A  youthful  writer  is  often  led  to  the  choice  of  an 
excessive  bulk  of  substance,  if  he  chooses  it  conscious- 
ly* by  the  belief  that  vastness  of  subject  will  insure 
abundance  of  materials,  and  that  for  him,  in  his  inex- 
perience, it  may  be  necessary  in  order  to  secure  suffi- 
ciency of  materials.  Just  the  reverse  of  this  is  true  iu 
fact.  If  your  inventive  power  is  sluggish,  restriction 
of  theme  will  stimulate  it :  if  it  is  active,  restriction  of 
theme  will  give  it  scope.  Invention  exercised  on  a 
restricted  proposition  is  microscopic.  It  discovers 
much,  which,  in  ranging  over  a  broader  surface,  it 
would  lose.  It  is  penetrative.  It  goes  in  to  the  heart 
of  a  theme.  The  mind  labors,  if  the  expression  may 
be    allowed,    perpendicularly,    not    horizontally,    not 


/■  / 


j^CT.  xxu.]      THE  PROPOSITION :    SUBSTANCE.  811 

jobliquely.  The  result  of  such  labor  is  that  kind  of 
discussion  which  is  the  opposite  of  discursive.  The 
sermon  impresses  a  hearer  with  the  conviction  that  the 
marrow  of  the  subject  has  been  reached.  The  preacher 
speaks  from  a  full  experience  of  its  richness  in  his  own 
mind.     Such  preaching  seems  inspired. 

Observe  a  few  illustrations  of  this  stimulus  to  inven- 
tion from  restriction  of  theme.  Do  not  certain  packed 
propositions  quicken  your  thinking  upon  them  in  the 
verj  hearing  ?  Listen  to  Dr.  South :  "  Religion  is  the 
best  reason  of  State ; "  "  Good  intentions  are  no  excuse 
for  bad  actions ; "  "  Concealment  of  sin  is  no  security 
to  the  sinner."  Do  not  such  aphoristic  propositions 
invite  thought?  Hear  Reinhard:  "Faithfulness  in 
present  duty  qualifies  for  higher  functions;"  "The 
instruments  which  God  chooses  are  not  such  as  man 
would  have  chosen ; "  "  The  temptations  attending 
opportunities  of  doing  good."  Who  does  not  feel  that 
he  could  enjoy  constructing  a  sermon  on  any  one  of 
these  themes  ?  The  singleness  of  them  is  interesting : 
the  compactness  of  them  is  quickening.  Yet  the  whole 
of  them,  and  as  many  more,  have  often  been  spread  out 
sprawling,  and  with  ample  room  to  spare,  in  one  flabby 
discourse  on  the  Importance  of  Religion. 

Moreover,  restriction  of  subject  has  a  tendency  to 
freshen  stale  truths.  "  Go  thy  way  for  this  time :  when 
I  have  a  convenient  season,  I  will  call  for  thee ; "  —  a 
stale  text  is  this.  How  shall  we  elude  a  stale  sermon  ? 
Thousands  of  discourses  have  been  preached  from  this 
text,  on  procrastination  of  repentance.  Can  we  get 
any  thing  better  from  it?  Study  the  text  for  a  mo- 
ment in  its  surroundings.  From  the  context,  it  appears 
that  Felix  was  deeply  interested  in  St.  Paul's  preach- 
ing.   What  was  it  which  attracted  him  so  greatly  at 


c 


312  1?HB  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.         [lbct.  xxn 

the  first  ?  It  was  the  "  faith  in  Christ,"  we  are  told 
that  is,  it  was  the  theory  of  the  new  religion.  What 
was  it  in  the  second  hearing  which  led  the  governor 
to  give  the  polite  reouff  to  the  Apostle  ?  It  was  the 
preaching  of  "  righteousness,  temperance,  and  the  judg- 
ment to  come."  That  is,  when  the  preacher  began  to 
develop  the  practical  bearings  of  Christianity  upon  cer- 
tain sins  of  which  Felix  was  notoriously  guilty,  then  it 
was  that  the  message  was  so  coolly  given,  "Go  thy 
way."  Therefore  we  educe  from  the  text  this  propo- 
sition, that  "  Men  who  are  deeply  interested  in  religion 
as  a  theory  often  revolt  from  it  as  an  experience."  Are 
not  the  stale  text  and  the  commonplace  subject,  by 
such  restriction  of  range,  freshened  to  the  thought  of 
both  preacher  and  hearer  ? 

This  vitalizing  of  stale  themes  is  one  of  the  great 
arts  of  the  pulpit.  Avoid  such  themes  we  can  not. 
Treat  them  in  the  rut  of  centuries  of  preaching  we 
dare  not.  We  must  accept  them  for  dead  truths ;  and 
all  the  ingenuity  of  homiletic  art,  and  the  magnetic 
force  and  the  prophetic  inspiration  of  the  preacher 
must  be  called  into  requisition  to  resuscitate  them. 
We  must  brood  over  such  subjects  with  the  intensity 
of  our  own  being,  as  the  prophet  stretched  himself 
upon  the  dead  body  of  the  widow's  child,  till  a  new 
life  is  breathed  into  them^  Any  expedient  which  can 
assist  that  inspiration  may  be  vital  to  our  success.  One 
such  expedient  is  that  of  a  retrenchment  of  theme  for 
the  sake  of  concentration  of  force. 

Further :  restriction  of  subject  is  of  special  value  to 
the  interest  of  doctrinal  preaching.  Doctrinal  preach- 
ing and  dull  preaching  are,  in  the  popular  estimate, 
synonymous.  We  deceive  ourselves,  if  we  charge  the 
unpopularity  of  doctrinal   sermons  to   the  account  of 


LfioT.  xxn.]     THE  PROPOSITION :   SUi>STANCE.  313 

depravity,  and  leave  it  there.  The  prime  cause  of  the 
popular  distaste  for  theological  discussion  in  the  pidpit 
is  its  want  of  certain  elements  which  are  essential  to 
vivacity.  Study  the  experience  of  the  pulpit  candidly, 
and  you  will  discover  that  audiences  will  listen  atten- 
tively to  any  thing  which  seems  to  them  to  be  alive. 

Why  did  such  events  as  the  burning  of  the  "  Lexing> 
ton,"  the  wreck  of  the  "  Arctic,"  the  duel  between  the 
^* Merrimack"  and  the  "Monitor,"  and  the  conflagra- 
tions at  Chicago  and  Boston  start  up  all  over  the  land 
discussions  of  the  doctrine  of  a  special  Providence? 
Not  only  in  pulpits  and  prayer-meetings,  but  in  secu- 
lar newspapers,  in  magazines,  in  railway-cars,  in  steam- 
boats, at  coroner's  inquests,  and  at  tea-tables,  within 
three  months  after  each  of  those  events,  men  wrote  and 
talked  enough  on  the  doctrine  of  Providence  to  make 
up  the  sermons  of  a  lifetime.  Goethe  tells  us  that  a 
similar  state  of  things  all  over  Europe  followed  the 
earthquake  at  Lisbon.  Was  it  dull  talking  and  stale 
reading?  Did  men  go  to  sleep  over  it?  Why  not? 
Simply  because  it  was  religious  doctrine  born  into  real 
life,  and  reproduced  in  living  speech.  Men  felt  the 
HeeH  of  it ;  and  they  gave  and  took  it  in  the  forms  of 
real  life.  The  same  is  true  of  any  other  doctrine. 
Make  the  doctrine  live,  and  live  men  and  women  will 
accept  it  as  their  spiritual  food.  Truth  or  falsehood,  it 
makes  little  difference.  Any  thing  can  obtain  an  in- 
terested hearing  which  has  any  mental  oxygen  in  it. 

Infidelity  will  outstrip  orthodoxy  in  any  community, 
sooner  or  later,  if  all  the  electric  force  seems  to  be 
given  over  to  error,  and  truth  has  to  bear  all  the  dead 
and  dying  and  decaying  things  of  civUized  life,  and  to 
struggle  through  the  consequent  mephitic  vapors. 
Let  the  resources  of  learning,  the  courage  of  inquiry^ 


314  THE  THEORY  OF  ^REACHING.         [lbct.  xxn. 

the  energy  of  reform,  a  vitalized  style  be  found  in  infi- 
del literature,  and  there  only,  while  the  religious  press 
falls  behind  and  below  in  these  tokens  of  mental  quick- 
ening, and  we  must  not  croak  over  the  degeneracy  of 
the  times,  if  truth  goes  under  for  a  while,  and  error 
rides  the  wave.  This  world  is,  in  the  main,  a  living 
world.  Life  craves  life.  Thought  runs  to  thought. 
Originality  springs  to  greet  originality.  Awakened 
readers  clamor  for  quickened  authors.  Live  hearers 
will  throng  upon  live  speakers.     The  pulpit,  in  this  re- 

Apect,  is  subject  to  no  hardship.  It  only  comes  under 
the  common  law  of  all  living  thought.  The  Holy 
Spirit  does  not  work  miracles  to  give  success  to  dull- 
ness. 

"We  must,  therefore,  meet  fairly  the  question.  How 
shall  life  be  infused  into  doctrinal  discussions?  Many 
things  are  requisite,  but  at  present  we  are  concerned 
with  one  only.     It  is  the  rhetorical  expedient  of  re- 

^stricting  the  substance  of  the  theme  for  the  sake  of 
stimulating  the  invention  of  the  preacher.     A  standing 

'  grievance  in  the  pulpit  on  this  subject  is  that  of  at- 
tempting too  much  in  one  discourse.  Rarely,  if  ever, 
should  a  standard  doctrine  of  theology  be  presented 
entire  in  one  sermon.  What  is  the  necessary  effect  of 
such  crowding  of  material  ?  Recall  your  own  experience 
as  listeners.  Have  you  not  heard  sermons  of  this  kind 
which  were  only  synopses  ?  They  had  not  a  fragment 
of  any  oratorical  element  in  them.  They  were  abstracts 
of  theological  treatises.  A  sermon,  so  called,  was  once 
preached  in  Boston,  in  which  the  nature,  the  necessity, 
the  proofs,  the  extent,  and  the  moral  influences  of  the 
Atonement  were  all  treated  in  succession.  It  was  one 
of  the  most  unimpressive  discourses  I  ever  heard,  yet 
on  a  theme  imperial  in  its  grandeur.     It  was  delivered 


LKiTT.  XXII.]      THE  PROPOSITION :    SUBSTANCE.  315 

to  a  most  listless  handful  of  an  audience.  It  fell  like 
lead.  No  fault  of  the  hearer  was  it,  if  he  was  neither 
sanctified  nor  converted  by  such  a  sermon.  Preaching 
under  such  ^a  load  of  subject  is  like  swimming  in  a 
diving-bell/  Such  synopses  of  theology  are  not  made 
for  the  pulpit  any  more  than  the  diving-dress  is  made 
for  speed.  / 

If  preachers  should  treat  every  other  class  of  themes 
in  this  suffocating  method,  all  preaching  would  soon 
become  as  lifeless  and  as  unpopular  as  much  of  the 
so-called  doctrinal  preaching  is  to-day.  On  the  other 
hand,  if  you  will  preach  upon  doctrines  as  you  preach 
upon  duties,  by  analyzing  the  themes  in  bulk,  and 
retrenching  the  range  of  single  topics,  and  thus  secur- 
ing opportunity  to  use  your  materials  as  you  would  use 
other  means  of  moral  impression,  you  will  find  no  other 
themes  of  the  pulpit  so  popular  as  the  doctrines  of  the 
theological  system.  Dr.  Griffin's  most  powerful  dis- 
courses were  doctrinal  discussions.  Look  at  the  "  Park- 
street  Lectures,"  doctrinal  sermons  every  one.  They 
were  so  high-toned  in  their  severity  of  legal  preaching 
as  to  win  for  the  junction  of  Tremont  and  Park  Streets 
the  nickname  of  "  Brimstone  Corner."  Yet  they  were 
preached  to  crowded  and  entranced  assemblies.  Dr> 
Nettleton's  most  popular  sermons  were  upon  "  election  *' 
and  "  decrees." 

Dr.  Chalmers's  sermons  on  depravity  were  delivered 
to  enraptured  crowds ;  and  the  few  in  the  windows 
leported  fragments  to  the  multitude  which  filled  the 
street  below.  One  reason  of  the  popularity  of  those 
discourses  was  that  he  threw  aside  the  historic  formulae 
of  the  doctrine,  and  restricted  attention  in  each  sermon 
to  one  leading  thought,  repeating  and  reiterating  that 
thought  in  such  variety  of  rhetorical  forms  that  his 

ir 


4J>^ 


.0^        /  /i 


616  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHINa.         [leot.  xxn. 

cumbrous  style  was  no  impediment  to  its  reception,  but 
a  help  rather.  It  operated  like  a  sledge-hammer  to  drive 
the  matter  home.  The  series  numbers  seventeen  dis- 
courses. Listen  to  some  of  the  propositions:  "The 
Necessity  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  give  Effect  to  thft 
Preaching  of  the  Gospel ; "  "An  Estimate  of  the  Mo- 
rality which  is  without  Godliness ;  "  "The  Judgment  of 
Men  compared  with  the  Judgment  of  God;"  "The 
Folly  of  Men  who  measure  Themselves  by  Themselves ;  " 
"  The  Affection  of  Moral  Esteem  towards  God ; "  "  The 
Power  of  the  Gospel  to  dissolve  the  Enmity  of  the 
Heart  against  God." 

Compare  these  propositions  with  the .  stereotyped 
method  of  discussing  the  doctrine  of  depravity.  They 
could  all  of  them,  and  several  more,  be  compressed  into 
a  sermon  in  which  a  preacher  should  announce  as  his 
subject  the  doctrine  of  total  depravity.  "  First,  what 
is  not  the  true  doctrine ;  secondly,  what  is  the  true 
doctrine ;  thirdly,  biblical  proofs  of  the  doctrine ; 
fourthly,  the  evidences  of  the  doctrine  from  reason  and 
from  experience;  fifthly,  applicatory  inferences  and 
remarks."  Hearers  of  such  a  sermon  would  retire, — 
the  pious  hearers  silent,  or  wishing,  for  their  children's 
sake,  that  they  could  have  more  "  practical "  preaching, 
and  the  profane  hearers  grumbling,  or  scoffing  at  anti- 
quated theology.  Chalmers,  on  the  other  hand,  sent 
home  his  hearers  of  both  classes  delighted  with  the 
attractiveness,  and  impressed  with  the  power,  of  the 
same  theology,  even  in  the  forms  of  Scotch  Calvinism. 
His  power  to  do  this  was  due,  in  part,  to  his  taking  time 
to  do  it,  and  concentrating  his  invention  on  fragments  of 
the  truth,  instead  of  massing  the  whole  in  one  unwieldy 
and  indigestible  bulk. 

Preach  by  the  scholastic  model,  and  you  doom  your- 


LKCT.  xxn.]      THE  PROPOSITION  .    SUBSTANCE.  317 

self  to  drudgery,  and  your  hearers  to  somnolence. 
Preach  by  the  (if  I  may  coin  the  word)  Chalmerian 
mpdei,  and,  with  precisely  the  same  ultimate  materials, 
you  become  a  genius  to  your  hearers  for  your  origi- 
nality, and  they  become  converts  at  your  will.  The 
distinction  between  doctrinal  and  practical  sermons,  by 
which  the  one  is  the  synonym  of  dullness  jnd  the  other 
of  life,  vanishes.  Both  are  alive,  because  you  give  your- 
self room  to  put  life  into  them. 

The  principle  advocated  in  these  remarks  suggests 
the  inquiry  whether  the  more  comprehensive  method  of 
discussion  is  ever  expedient  in  the  pulpit.  This  leads 
me  to  observe  that  comprehensive  themes  may  some- 
times be  demanded  by  speciality  of  occasion.  The  dis- 
course for  which  Rev.  Albert  Barnes  was  first  arraigned 
for  heresy  before  the  Presbyterian  courts  was  upon  sub- 
stantially the  whole  system  of  the  gospel.  It  was  en- 
titled "The  Way  of  Salvation."  Its  object  was  to 
present  in  a  single  bird's-eye  view  the  whole  plan  of 
God  in  saving  men.  That  sermon  he  afterwards  ampli- 
fied into  thirty-six  discourses,  which  he  published  as  a 
volume  of  nearly  five  hundred  pages. 

In  like  manner  any  preacher  may  find  special  occasion 
for  presenting  an  entire  doctrine,  or  even  a  group  of 
kindred  doctrines,  in  one  sermon.  One  may  wish  to 
run  over  the  keys  of  all  those  doctrines  which  appeal 
to  fear,  for  the  sake  of  showing  the  legitimacy  of  that 
emotion  in  religious  experience.  Occasionally,  to  show 
that  a  doctrine  is  one  of  a  group  of  doctrines,  and  that, 
without  it,  the  symmetry  of  divine  truth  would  be 
defective,  may  be  a  valuable  work.  One  of  the  most 
convincing  proofs  of  the  truth  of  eternal  punishment, 
to  thoughtful  inquirers,  is  the  fact  of  the  necessity  of  it 
to  a  certain  balance  with  other  truths  of  divine  revela 


318  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.         [lkct.  xxit 

tion.  Depravity,  Regeneration,  Atonement,  and  Eternal 
Retribution  form  a  quadrilateral  system  of  theology. 
No  one  of  them  can  be  obliterated  without  loss  to  the 
rest.  They  are  in  keeping  with  each  other.  The 
intensity  of  each  requires  the  intensity  of  the  others 
to  preserve  an  equilibrium  of  moral  impression.  To 
show  that  an  endless  retribution  is  one  of  such  a  four- 
fold group  of  truths  may  be,  to  a  certain  c-jass  of 
thinkers,  the  only  decisive  proof  of  its  reality. 

All  such  examples  are  exceptional.  They  are  justi- 
fied, if  at  all,  by  some  speciality  of  aim.  They  are  not 
thorough  discussions  of  all  the  truth  presented.  They 
would  have  no  moral  force  if  they  were  the  common 
product  of  the  pulpit.  They  need  to  be  preceded  and 
followed  by  more  analytic  discussions  requiring  restric- 
tion of  theme. 

j     (2)  Passing  now  from  the  topic  of  retrenchment  of 
/rJ  /proposition,  let  us  observe  further,  that  the  substance 
\^     /^  of  a  proposition  should  not  comprise  less  material  than 
is  sufficient  for  impressive   discussion  in  one  sermon. 
tf  '       A   theme   of    discourse    may  be    diminutive   in   itself 
^'       considered.     A  German   preacher  once   discoursed  on 
the  best  method  of  manufacturing  vinegar.     Another 
preached  on  benevolence  in  the  care  of  bees.     A  pastor 
in  Massachusetts  preached  on  the  sin  of  raising  apples 
for  cider ;  another,  on  the  evil  of  lounging  on  the  door- 
steps of  the  church  during  the  intermission  of  divine 
service  on  the  Sabbath.    A  preacher  in  New  Jersey 
preached  on  the  marriage  of   Adam.     Each  of  these 
subjects,  except  the  first,  had  a  religious  or  a  moral  idea 
as  its  basis.     Even  upon  the  first,  a  useful,  though  acid, 
discourse  might  be  deliverer.     Yet  it  is  obvious  that 
intrinsically  they  are  puny  themes.     A  preacher's  mind 
is  in  a  molecular  mood  in  selecting  such  themes.     They 


JiyJ;.^^^-^'-^    ^yjr^^ 


LECT.  xxii.l      THE  PROPOSITION  :    SUBSTANCE.  319 

are  scarcely  crumbs  from  a  Master's  table.  Yet  in 
more  doubtful  cases  a  discussion  may  suffer  from 
excessive  restriction  of  subject.  A  subject  is  to  be 
suspected  of  this  defect,  if,  in  planning  a  discourse 
upon  it.  you  find  yourself  straining  to  dignify  it  by 
force  of  style.  A  good  subject  sustains  the  style,  not 
the  style  the  subject. 

Again :  a  theme  may  be  diminutive  relatively  to  the 
materials  amassed  for  its  discussion.  It  was  a  mark  of 
prolific  genius  that  Cowper  could  evolve  so  long  and  so 
rich  a  poem  as  "  The  Task,"  and  one  which  entered  at 
once  into  the  rank  of  the  standards  of  the  language, 
from  the  subject  of  "A  Sofa,"  accidentally  suggested  to 
him  by  Mrs.  Unwin.  Yet  such  productions  are  un- 
natural structures.  They  build  materials  in  unnatural 
proportions.  They  are  pyramids  on  apexes.  They  do  , 
not  grow  out  of  a  symmetrical  taste.  To  such  a  taste  \ 
it  is  no  defense  of  a  diminutive  subject  to  say  that  it  has 
remote  and  underground  connections  with  themes  the  > 
noblest  and  most  profound.  All  thought  has  such  con-  / 
nections.  But  the  highest  inventive  power  will  not, 
therefore,  exhaust  itself  by  choosing  diminutive  centers 
of  thought.  (  An  Indian  tobacco-sign  has  remote  resem- 
blance to  the  anatomy  and  muscular  development  of  a 
man.  But  an  artist  does  not,  for  that  reason,  choose  it 
as  his  model  of  an  Apollo.  )  Nothing  is  greatest  which  is 
eccentric.  Michael  Angelo  is  said  to  have  abandoned 
painting  on  canvas,  because  of  his  disgust  at  the  petti- 
ness of  it  as  compared  with  painting  in  fresco.  Fresco- 
painting,  he  said,  was  the  art  for  heroes,  because  no 
other  gave  scope  to  the  execution  of  great  designs. 
So  genius  in  literature  craves  a  certain  naturalness  of 
things  to  things  in  its  productions.  On  this  principle 
perf3ct  discDurse  demands  naturalness  of  materials  to 


820  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.         [lect.  xxii. 

subject  lA  this  element  of  size.  That  can  not  be 
a  comely  structure  in  which  immense  or  profound 
the  ght  hangs  as  a  pendant  to  a  proposition  of  which 
the  first  and  the  last  impression  is  trivial. 

Further:  a  theme  of  discourse  may  be  diminutive 
relatively  to  the  dignity  of  the  pulpit.  Not  every  use- 
ful theme  is  sufficiently  useful  to  deserve  a  place  in  the 
pulpit.  Not  every  useful  theme  is  religious  enough  for 
the  pulpit.  Not  every  religious  theme  is  important 
enough  for  the  pulpit.  ( No  other  spot  on  earth  is  so 
environed  by  associations  of  dignity  as  a  Christian  pul- 
pit. /  Its  subjects  should  bear  proportions  to  such  asso- 
ciations. The  popular  instinct,  which  prompts  a  man 
to  lift  his  hat  on  entering  a  place  of  worship,  should  be 
honored  by  a  preacher  in  the  selection  of  a  subject  of 
discourse  which  deserves  such  an  act  of  popular  rever- 
ence. We  need  something  of  the  character  of  command 
in  the  proposition  of  a  sermon.  The  first  impression  of 
it,  and  the  last,  and  the  dignity  of  it,  therefore,  in  the 
memory,  should  be  such  as  to  sustain  the  pulpit  in  its 
appeal  to  the  reverence  of  men.  For  this  end  a  cer- 
tain bulk  of  substance  is  essential.  We  should  often 
inquire  whether  a  restricted  theme  is  not  more  properly 
a  division  than  a  proposition.  That  which  is  necessary 
as  a  division,  or  valuable  as  an  application,  may  have  nc 
such  commanding  importance  as  to  be  worthy  of  a  place 
at  the  head  of  a  sermon. 

Yet  again :  a  theme  of  discourse  may  be  diminutive 
relatively  to  the  claims  of  other  subjects  upon  the  pul- 
pit. Time  in  the  pulpit  is  invaluable.  No  preacher 
can  afford  to  squander  an  hour  of  it.  The  vital,  the 
necessary,  the  imperial  topics  of  homiletic  discussion 
are  more  in  number  than  the  opportunities  of  preaching 
in  any  one  lifetime.     Multitudes  of  such  themes  throng 


LIK1T.  XXII.]      THE  PROPOSITION :    SUBSTANCE.  821 

every  pulpit.  Great  themes  are  always  waiting  for  a 
hearing.  Young  preachers  sometimes  fear  a  dearth  of 
subjects  in  looking  forward  to  a  life's  work.  That  is 
the  last  thing  you  need  to  fear,  if  you  are  studious 
preachers.  Dr.  Archibald  Alexander  is  reported, 
though  I  doubt  the  fact,  to  have  advised  a  young  min- 
ister, that,  when  he  had  exhausted  his  stock  of  subjects, 
he  could  always  "pitch  into  Romanism."  Never  was 
advice  more  useless.  "  Pitch  into  "  your  Bibles,  rather, 
would  I  say.  Keep  a  commonplace  book  of  fertile 
texts  and  suggestive  themes,  and  you  will  find  that 
no  other  inventory  of  your  intellectual  property  will 
crowd  your  pulpit  so  soon  or  so  hopelessly.  Your  de- 
spair will  soon  be,  not  "What  shall  I  preach?"  but 
"What  may  I  omit  in  preaching?"  Ten  subjects  for 
one  which  you  can  find  time  and  place  for  in  your 
preaching  will  you  accumulate  in  your  inventory. 
Select,  then,  the  choice  themes  of  discussion,  and  only 
those.  Of  important  themes,  choose  the  most  im- 
portant. Of  prolific  themes,  give  place  to  the  most 
prolific.  Deal  only  with  superlatives.  Accept  only 
the  aristocracy  of  thought.  Apply  mercilessly  the  law 
of  natural  selection.  Let  only  that  live  which  must 
live. 

The  Rev.  James  Alexander  says  on  this  subject,  "  I 
iim  impressed  with  the  importance  of  choosing  great 
subjects  for  sermons.  .  .  .  They  should  be  the  great 
themes  whioh  have  agitated  the  world,  which  we  should 
like  to  have  settled  before  we  die,  which  we  should  ask 
an  Apostle  about  if  he  were  here.  They  are  to  general 
Scripture  truth  what  great  mountains  are  to  geography. 
...  A  man  should  begin  early  with  great  subjects. 
An  athlote  gains  might  only  by  great  exertions."  In 
this  view  of  (he  matter,  then,  it  is  clear  that  no  pulpit 


S22  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.         li-ect.  xxtl 

has  room  for  diminutive  propositions.  We  should  not 
be  deterred  from  the  adoption  of  this  policy  by  the  fact 
that  the  great  themes  are  the  hackneyed  themes  of  the 
pulpit.  They  doubtless  are  such.  This  is  an  inevitable 
evil  which  must  be  met,  but  it  is  less  than  it  seems. 
The  great  subjects  are  not  the  same  to  any  two  mindd. 
No  two  preachers  would  treat  them  alike,  unless  one  or 
both  should  borrow.  The  range  of  suggestion  of  a 
great  theme  is  immeasurable.  The  opportunity  for 
versatile  treatment  is  immense. 

Mark  the  analogy  of  the  work  of  the  pulpit  in  this 
respect  with  other  great  arts.  The  great  sculptors  and 
painters  have  chosen  the  same  scenes  and  characters. 
Their  fame  rests,  for  the  most  part,  on  a  few  great  sub- 
jects ;  yet  no  two  productions  are  alike.  Go  through  the 
galleries  of  Italy,  and  you  will  find  that  the  really  great 
works  of  painting  and  sculpture  are  on  very  few  subjects, 
and  these  often  repeated.  So  the  great  tragedies  of  the 
drama  revolve  in  dramatic  passion  a  few  great  ideas. 
From  ^schylus  and  Sophocles  downward,  the  great- 
ness of  the  drama  has  not  consisted  in  the  multitude  of 
its  ideas.  Shakespeare  originated  but  very  few  plots. 
He  elaborated  those  which  had  already  proved  their 
power  over  the  human  sympathies.  The  same  prin- 
ciple holds  good  in  preaching.  The  great  subjects, 
though  few,  never  lose  their  power  if  treated  by  a  fresh 
mind.  The  need  of  them  never  grows  old.  Put  joui 
soul  into  them,  and  they  are  always  fresh. 

Further :  a  theme  of  discourse  may  be  diminuti  "e 
relatively  to  symmetry  of  impression.  Some  proposi- 
tions it  is  not  safe  to  divide,  and  discuss  on  different 
occasions.  The  objections  to  a  doctrine  may  be  in 
themselves  an  ample  subject  for  one  sermon;  but  it 
might  be   unwise   to   construct  a   discourse    of    such 


LEcrr.  xxn]      THE  PROPOSITION :    jSUBSTANCE.  323 

materials,  reserving  the  answer  to  a  subsequent  time. 
This  experiment  was  once  tried  by  a  preacher  to  the 
students  of  a  New  England  college.  In  the  morning 
he  delivered  a  sermon  composed  almost  wholly  of 
objections  to  a  certain  doctrine,  and  gave  notice  that 
he  would  answer  them  in  the  afternoon.  He  laid  out 
liis  strength  upon  an  effort  of  candor ;  stated  the  skep- 
tical argument  in  full,  as  if  he  were  himself  the  skeptic  ; 
and  ended  in  the  triumphant  consciousness  that  he 
would  demolish  the  whole  structure  in  a  few  hours. 
The  students  enjoyed  the  skeptical  preacher  hugely. 
The  afternoon  came,  and  with  it  a  furious  thunder- 
storm while  the  church-bells  were  ringing.  Very  few 
students  were  present ;  and  the  preacher  had  the  credit 
of  having  delivered  an  unanswered,  if  not  ujianswera- 
ble  argument  against  his  own  faith. 

Again :  certain  subjects  contain  opposite  elements  ol 
impression  which  symmetry  may  forbid  us  to  sunder. 
They  lie  over  against  each  other.  They  are  fortresses 
which  have  an  outlook  to  the  east  and  to  the  west. 
One  of  such  twin  doctrines  discussed  alone  may  not  be 
truthful.  As  the  human  body  has  double  brains,  so 
the  human  mind  has  affinities  for  these  double  truths. 
In  some  connections,  to  separate  them  is  like  looking  at 
one  only  of  the  two  sections  of  a  stereoscopic  picture. 
.Finally:  the  force  of  cumulative  arguments  may  be 
weakened  by  dismemberment.  Cumulative  argument 
depends  on  continuity  of  impression.  Separate  the 
links  of  the  chain  and  the  magnetic  accumulation  of 
impression  is  impracticable:  cumulation  deraanda 
unity. 


LECTURE  XXra. 

THE  PEOPOSITION:   SUBSTANCE,   FORMS. 

Let  the  suggestions  of  the  last  lecture  concerning  the 
relation  of  a  proposition  to  the  sermon  be  now  applied 
by  observing  certain  indecisive  reasons  for  retrenchment. 
We  often  meet  with  inducements  to  frame  a  restricted 
proposition,  which  may,  but  which  may  not,  be  good 
L-^,  reasons  for  such  a  policy.  All  that  can  be  said  of 
*    ^  them,  in  general,  is  that  they  are  not  conclusive. 


.^ 


^^  One  of  these  indecisive  reasons  is  fruitfulness  of 
theme.  We  may  be  beguiled  into  the  policy  of  restric- 
tion by  the  excitement  of  composition.  Under  that 
excitement  a  subject  opens  luxuriantly.  In  the  midst 
of  the  discussion  we  may  seem  to  be  more  distant  from 
the  end  than  at  the  beginning.  ^  A  traveler  never  seems 
to  himself  so  far  away  from  everywhere  as  when  he  is 
in  mid-ocean  in  a  gale.  Fruitfulness  of  them 3  may 
be  good  reason  for  retrenchment ;  but  it  may  not.  Do 
not  trust  implicity  to  the  glow  of  composition.  Your 
original  survey  of  the  subject  in  a  calmer  mood  may  be 
the  more  trustworthy. 

For  the  same  reason,  convenience  in  composition  is 
no  conclusive  defense  of  a  restricted  theme.  This  will 
often  tempt  you.  You  will  state  a  subject  in  its  full- 
ness ;  but  you  will  often  find  that  composing  is  unex- 
pectedly easy  in  the  first  half  of  the  discourse.     You 

324 


I.ECT.  xxiii.]    THE  PROPOSITION  :    SUBSTANCE.  325 

come  upon  a  ledge  of  soft  stone  in  the  quarry ;  you 
prefer  to  work  it  for  the  ease  of  the  working.  Hence 
you  fall  back,  and  retrench  your  proposition.  In  the 
majority  of  such  cases  the  restrictive  policy  for  such  a 
reason  is  unwise.  The  original  bulk  of  subject,  treated 
by  a  wise  selection  from  the  superabundant  materials, 
and  packed  well  into  one  sermon,  would  do  more  exe- 
cution at  the  time,  and  would  live  longer  in  the  mem- 
ory of  hearers,  than  if  it  were  bisected,  and  expanded 
into  the  double  sermon  which  has  been  so  common  in 
the  history  of  the  American  pulpit.  The  soft  ledge  ir 
the  quarry  is  probably  not  the  most  desirable  materia. 
with  which  to  build.  Select  materials  from  a  full  mind 
are  the  ideal  matter  for  a  sermon. 

Another  inconclusive  argument  for  retrenching  a 
proposition  is  the  desire  to  exhaust  the  subject  proposed 
The  idea  of  exhausting  a  subject  as  distinct  from  a 
proposition  we  must  often  abandon.  Some  subjects  we 
can  not  exhaust.  The  best  subjects  we  can  not  ex- 
haust. Yet  these  are  subjects  which  may  require  a 
large  area  of  proposition  to  give  even  an  impressive 
fragment  of  them.  But  some  minds  are  so  constructed, 
that  they  can  not  traverse  a  large  area  of  material  with- 
out losing  all  sense  of  its  limitations,  and  therefore 
they  ramble  on  indefinitely.  Have  you  not  found 
preachers  and  authors  who  never  seem  to  know  when 
to  let  go  of  a  subject  ?  They  cling  to  it  with  a  tenaci- 
ty which  is  exhaustive  to  themselves,  and  afflictive  to 
their  hearers  and  readers.  Such  a  mind  was  that  of 
Dr.  Owen.  Such  was  that  of  Dr.  Charnock.  The 
English  pulpit  of  their  day  was  distinguished  by  noth- 
ing more  generally  than  by  pertinacity  of  discussion- 
The  sermon  which  Baxter  preached  before  King  Charlea 
II.  could  not  have  been  recited  in  less  than  two  hours. 


S26  THE  THEORY  OF   PREACHING.        [r,«OT.  xxiL 

Charno3k's  sermon  on  "  the  duty  and  reward  of  bounty 
to  the  poor"  requked  three  hours  and  a  half.  We 
must  not  feel  obliged  to  hunt  down  a  subject  into  all 
its  possible  lurking-places.  In  preaching,  as  in  com- 
mon life,  it  is  the  fool  who  is  able  to  utter  all  his  mind. 
Yet  we  must  not,  in  order  to  escape  this  extreme, 
dwarf  a  proposition.  Give  to  it  its  natural  dimensions. 
and  then  expand  the  sermon  to  those,  and  with  that 
be  content. 

(3)  We  have  observed  of  the  substance  of  the  propo- 
sition, that  it  should  not  contain  more  material  than  can 
be  well  discussed  in  one  sermon,  and  that  it  should  not 
contain  less  material  than  is  sufficient  for  impressive 
discussion  in  one  sermon.  These  principles  suggest  a 
third,  —  that  the  proposition  should  not  contain  other 
material  than  that  which  is  discussed  in  the  sermon. 
An  obvious  yet  not  uncommon  defect  in  sermons  is 
that  their  propositions  do  not  express  the  real  topics  of 
discourse.  The  proposition  may  promise  one  thing: 
the  sermon  may  realize  another.  Three  forms  of  this 
defect  deserve  notice.  One  is  that  in  which  the  propo- 
sition does  not  even  contain  the  subject  of  discourse. 
Want  of  accuracy  in  analysis  of  a  subject,  or  heedless- 
ness in  its  definition,  may  lead  a  preacher  to  announce 
as  his  theme  that  which  he  has  no  intention  to  discuss. 
This  occurs  more  fi-equently  than  one  would  suppose  it 
to  be  possible  to  an  educated  mind.  You  propose,  foi 
example,  to  treat  of  the  priyilege  of  fellowship  with 
Christ;  but  in  fact  you  treat  of  the  duty  of  fellow- 
ship with  Christ.  What  is  the  difference?  It  is  the 
difference  between  an  appeal  to  conscience  and  an 
appeal  to  the  sense  of  liberty.  This  represents  a 
considerable  class  of  sermons,  in  which  we  make  an 
iinconRcious  transition  from  the  higher  plane  of  libertj 


to  the  lower  plane  of  law.  Have  you  not  been  sensible 
of  this  in  listening  to  sermons  ?  A  subject  as  stated  has 
promised  a  cheering  side  of  truth ;  as  developed,  it  has 
insensibly  veered  around  to  the  sterner  side.  Begin- 
ning with  "  may,"  it  has  ended  with  "  must." 

Another  form  of  the  defect  before  us  is  that  in  wliich 
the  method  of  discussion  promised  in  the  proposition  is 
not  that  realized  in  the  development.  One  preacher 
proposes  to  consider  the  nature  of  repentance,  but  the 
thing  he  discusses  is  the  duty  of  repenting.  What  is  the 
fault  ?  Not  only  is  there  here  an  unwarranted  change 
of  subject,  but  a  necessary  change  of  rhetorical  charac- 
ter in  the  discussion!  In  discussing  the  nature  of  a  V. 
thing,  you  must  explain :  in  discussing  the  duty  of  the 
thing,  you  must  either  prove  or  persuade.  These  are 
very  different  rhetorical  processes,  —  different  to  the 
extent  of  producing  a  radical  difference  of  discourse. 
The  difficulty  originates  in  a  want  of  a  thorough  diges- 
tion of  the  materials  before  the  proposition  is  framed. 
The  remedy  lies  in  the  construction  of  a  well-framed 
plan  of  discourse  at  the  outset. «  Keep  always  in  mind 
that  a  proposition  is  a  promise:  it  demands  foresight 
of  your  means  of  payment.  \ 

A  third  variety  of  the  defect  under  consideration  is 
that  in  which  the  proposition  suggests  a  different  point 
of  unity  from  that  which  the  discourse  develops.  What 
is  the  point  of  unity  in  a  discourse  ?  It  is  that  point 
to  which  all  the  impressions  of  the  discourse  converge. 
It  corresponds  to  the  hero  of  a  drama  or  of  an  epic 
poem.  It  is  to  a  sermon  what  Hamlet  and  Othello  are 
to  the  tragedies  which  bear  their  names.  Must  a  ser- 
mon have  a  point  of  unity  ?  Yes,  if  well  constructed. 
It  lies  in  the  nature  of  persuasive  discourse.  Such  dis- 
course is  a  structure ;  it  must  have  an  aim ;  that  aim 


328  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       [lect.  xxm. 

must  gather  into  itself  all  the  forces  of  impression 
which  the  discourse  creates.  Must,  then,  the  unity  of 
a  proposition  and  the  unity  of  a  discussion  coincide? 
Certainly :  there  can  be  no  perfect  discourse  without 
tliis  coincidence.  A  proposition  is  but  a  figure-head  to 
a  sermon,  if  it  does  not  suggest  the  true  center  of  in* 
terest  in  the  sermon. 

Observe  an  illustration  of  this  defect  in  secular  lite- 
rature. Shakespeare's  "  Julius  Caesar  "  has  been  cen- 
sured by  critics  for  its  title,  because  Caesar  is  not  the 
central  character  of  the  drama.  Brutus  is  its  center  of 
interest.  Brutus  gives  unity  to  the  plot.  Around  Bru- 
tus eveiy  other  character  and  every  event  revolve. 
The  intensity  of  the  drama  deepens  with  the  develop- 
ment of  the  destiny  of  Brutus ;  and,  when  Brutus  dies, 
nothing  remains  to  sustain  tragic  impression.  On  this 
theory  the  title  of  the  play  should  have  been  "  Marcus 
Brutus."  Dryden  was  so  much  impressed  by  the  justice 
of  this  criticism,  that  he  once  edited  the  drama  with 
an  amended  title :  "  Julius  Caesar,  with  the  death  of 
Brutus."  This  shows  at  least  the  need  of  identity  be- 
tween the  center  of  interest  in  a  work  of  art  and  the 
center  expressed  or  hinted  at  in  its  title.  The  title 
should  not  look  one  way,  and  the  work  another.  The 
same  principle  should  regulate  a  proposition  and  its  dis- 
cussion in  a  persuasive  discourse.  The  point  of  unity 
which  the  proposition  suggests  should  be  identical  with 
that  which  the  discourse  develops. 

The  violation  of  this  principle  is  often  illustrated  in 
sermons  on  the  governmental  theory  of  the  Atone- 
ment. Discourses  explaining  and  defending  that  the- 
ory are  often  framed  upon  some  such  propositions  as 
these:  "The  Grounds  of  the  Atonement  of  Christ-" 
"The  Reasons  for  the  Necessity  of  an  Atonement;" 


mcr.  xxm.]  THE  PROPOSITION ;   FORMS  329 

"Why  is  an  Atonement  necessary  for  the  Pardon  of 
Sin?"  Thee-e  forms  of  proposition,  you  wil  observe, 
are  sweeping.  They  profess  to  cover  the  whole  ground 
of  the  philosophy  of  the  Atonement.  Upon  them,  ox 
their  equivalents,  hundreds  of  sermons  have  been 
preached,  advancing  the  moral  necessities  of  the  uni- 
verse under  a  government  of  law,  as  explanatory'  of 
the  necessity  and  the  fact  of  Christ's  work  in  atoning 
for  sin.  What,  now,  is  the  defect  in  such  propositions 
for  such  discourses  ?  It  is,  as  before,  that  proposition 
and  sermon  suggest  different  points  of  unity.  Who 
knows  that  the  governmental  theory  of  the  Atonement 
comprises  all  the  grounds  of  it  in  the  mind  of  God? 
Who  can  prove  that  it  expresses,  therefore,  all  the 
reasons  for  the  necessity  of  the  Atonement?  Who 
can  venture  to  affirm  that  it  answers  in  full  the  ques- 
tion, "  Why  ?  "  Who  knows  in  full  the  reasons  for  the 
Atonement  ?  Anybody  can  ask,  but  who  can  answer, 
the  question  "  Why  ?  "  We  know  but  in  part :  we  see 
through  a  glass  darkly.  When  we  have  traced  the 
Atonement  to  the  moral  government  of  the  universe, 
and  that  to  the  mind  of  God,  we  have  followed  the 
rivulet  to  the  Amazon,  and  the  Amazon  to  the  sea,  and 
we  can  go  no  further.  We  discern  the  coloring  or  the 
eddies  of  the  stream  a  little  distance  from  the  shore, 
but  beyond  that  we  lose  it  in  an  infinite  unknown. 
This  example  illustrates  the  importance  of  the  defect 
we  are  considering,  in  its  bearing  upon  some  of  the 
most  critical  discussions  of  the  pulpit. 

In  judiciary  decisions  it  is  a  standing  principle  never 
to  anticipate  a  case,  never  to  expand  a  principle  beyond 
the  necessities  of  the  case  in  hand.  Such  should  be 
the  policy  of  the  pulpit  in  the  construction  of  proposi- 
tions.    Specify:  specify:  so  far  as  the  aim  of  the  dis* 


u 


330  THE  THEORY  OF  PREAC  fflKG.        [lect.  TTm 

course  admits,  always  specify.  Propose  no  other  than 
the  thing  to  be  realized.  Volunteer  nothing  in  the 
proposition  which  the  sermon  will  not  redeem.     Meet 

.^^       in  the  proposition  the  exact  demand  of  the  discussion ; 

\/    no  more,  no  less,  no  other. 

j^  IV.     The   fourth  general  topic  in  the  discussion  of 

propositions  is  that  of  their  forms.  In  the  treat- 
ment of  this  subject  I  must  trust  to  your  patience. 
The  form  of  any  thing  in  literature  is  a  dry  theme. 
Yet  in  practice  you  will  find  the  form  of  the  proposi- 
tion to  be  a  striking  feature  in  the  face  of  a  sermon. 
It  is  not  less  significant  in  discourse  than  the  nose  is  in 
the  human  countenance.  Both  are  expressive  of  char- 
acter. The  principles  of  perfect  form  apply  to  proposi- 
tions and  divisions,  to  a  great  extent,  alike.  Therefore, 
although  at  present  I  shall  speak  mainly  of  propositions, 
in  order  to  avoid  repetition  I  shall  sometimes  illustrate 
by  application  of  a  principle  to  divisions. 

1st,  Let  us,  first,  observe  certain  fundamental  distinc- 
tions of  form  in  the  statement  of  propositions. 

(1)  Your  collegiate  studies  have  made  you  familiar 
with  the  distinction  between  logical  and  rhetorical  prop- 
V  I  ositions.  A  logical  proposition  affirms  or  denies.  A 
^  rhetorical  proposition  states  a  subject  for  affirmation  or 
denial.  This,  it  should  be  remarked,  is  a  distinction 
in  form  only.  Any  subject  of  discussion  can  be  stated 
in  either  form.  Still  it  is  not,  on  this  account,  a  matter 
of  indifference  which  form  of  statement  is  selected. 
The  foundation  of  the  Hollis  Professorship  in  Harvard 
College  requires  the  incumbent  to  preach  tc  the  col- 
legians on  the  divinity  of  Christ.  The  report  was  once 
current  that  the  last  occupant  of  the  chair  preached 
against  the  divinity  of  Christ.  If  he  did  so,  the  design 
of  the  founder  was   frustrated  by  so  small  a  matter 


/. 


ijflOT.  xxm.]         tCHB'''^^()SITION  :   f6r1^«.  » *p^  831 


as  the  difference  between  a  rhetorical  and  a  logical 
proposition. 

(2)  Logical  propositions  are  distinguished  as  affirma- 
tive or  negative  in  form.  This,  also,  is  a  distinctioE 
in  form  only.  You  can  state  the  same  truth  either  by 
afilrming  it,  or  by  denying  its  opposites.  You  may  deny 
an  error  by  affirming  the  opposite  truth.  Any  logical 
truth  can  be  clothed  in  either  form.  Yet  often  we  may 
discern  very  positive  rhetorical  reasons  for  preferring 
one  form  to  the  other. 

(3)  Rhetorical  propositions  are  distinguishable  as 
declarative  or  interrogative  in  form.  Dr.  Barrow  has  a 
sermon  on  "  the  unsearchableness  of  God's  judgments." 
Dr.  Emmons  proposes,  as  a  theme  of  discourse,  "to 
inquire  whether  the  eternal  foreknowledge  of  God  is 
true,  and  how  can  it  be  true."  It  is  not  difficult  to 
see  that  very  significant  reasons  may  exist  for  a  choice 
between  these  two  forms  of  statement. 

(4)  All  the  forms  of  proposition  thus  far  defined 
may  be  further  distinguished  as  simple,  or  complex, 
or  plural  forms  of  proposition.  Dr.  Bushnell  has  a 
sermon,  the  proposition  of  which  is,  "  obligation  to  God 
is  a  privilege ; "  and  another,  the  proposition  of  which 
is,  "  we  require  to  be  unsettled  in  life  by  many  changes^ 
and  interruptions  of  adversity  in  order  to  be  most 
effectually  loosened  from  our  own  evils,  and  prepared 
to  the  will  and  work  of  God ; "  and  a  third,  the  propo- 
sition of  which  is:  "1.  That  we  live  under  a  cloud, 
and  see  God's  way  only  by  a  dim  light ;  2.  That  God 
shines  at  all  times  above  the  cloud ;  3.  That  this  cloud 
cf  obscuration  is  finally  to  be  cleared  away."  These 
are  specimens  of  the  simple  and  the  complex  and  the 
plural  propositions.  A  simple  proposition  mentions  a 
subject  only,  with  no  appendage  of  relations.     A  com' 


832  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       [lect.  ran 

plex  proposition  pursues  a  subject  into  its  relations, 
and  yet  retains  singleness  of  form.  A  plural  propo- 
sition specifies  a  group  of  topics  which  have  unity  of 
subject,  but  not  unity  of  form.  These  are  diversities 
in  form  only.  In  substance  they  may  be  interchanged. 
(5)  As  the  interchangeableness  of  propositions  is  a 
vital  point,  let  me  ask  you  to  observe  an  illustration  of 
it.  For  the  sake  of  simplicity  let  us  select  the  most 
trite  of  the  themes  of  the  pulpit,  —  that  of  repentance. 
Observe  how  the  substance  of  one  sermon  can  be  put 
through  all  the  forms  of  statement  which  have  been 
defined.  Xj3i)~-^ou  first  announce  as  your  theme  the 
f   }  subject  "  Rep_entance."      This   is   a   rhetorical  declara- 

■t  tive  proposition,  the  most  general  conceivable."    tJncTer 

/  it  you   can   discuss   any  thing  pertaining   to   repent- 

ance.    (b^You  inquire.  Is  it  the  duty  of  all  men  to 
repent?     You  thus  obtain  a  rhetorical  interrogative 
proposition.      Yet  you  may  array  under  it  the  very 
same  materials  as  before.     (<?)  You  propose  to  show 
that  it  is  the  duty  of  all  men  to  repent.     With  the 
same  ideal  as  before,  so  far  as  the  materials  are  con- 
\    cerned,  you  have  now  a  logical  affirmative  proposition. 
^  A>i   ^^^  ^^^  declare  as  your  theme,  "  No  man  can  be  ex- 
\  v^    j   empted  from  the  obligation  to  repent."    You  thus,  with 
QO  necessary  change  of  materials,  exchange  the  affirma- 
^  tive  for  a  negative  logical  proposition,      (g)  But  we 

I  (L.         may  suppose  that  the  design  of  your  discourse  involves 
f  some  consideration  of  the  necessity  of  the  Holy  Spirit 

jWSf^^  /  to  induce  repentance.  You  ask  attention  to  repent- 
T  r^  >  ^'iice  considered  as  the  duty  of  man  and  the  gift  of 
^t(^  \  Grod ;  or  you  propose  the  inquiry,  Is  repentance  both 
K^^  j  a  duty  and  a  gift  ?  or  you  affirm  the  fact,  all  men  aie 
^^,^^1  under  obligation  to  repent,  notwithstanding  their  de- 
^     »  peadence  on  the  Holy  Spirt;   or  you  deny  the  fact 


.^) 


>+i 


«.«CT.  xxra.]  THE  PROPOSITION :   FORMS.  333 

that  any  man  is  exempt  from  obligation  to  repent,  by 
the  necessity  of  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  By 
our  hypothesis,  there  is  no  essential  change  in  your 
ideal  of  what  the  sermon  is  to  be ;  but,  by  variations 
in  form  of  statement,  you  construct  four  varieties  of 
complex  proposition.  One_isjie clar a ti ve  ;  one  Js  in- 
terrogative ;  one  is  affirmative ;  one  is  negative ;  and 
all  are  complex  in  form.  (/)  But  suppose,  further, 
that  the  character  of  your  audience  seems  to  you  to  /^ 
require  the   extreme   of  clearness  in  specification   of  ^^ 

theme.     You  therefore   adopt  none  of  the  preceding        / /^^ 
forms  of  proposition.      But  you  say,  after  the  model 
which  Dr.  Emmons  so  often  adopts,  "  I  design  in  this 
discourse  to  establish  three  things:  1.  That  every  man 
is  under  obligation  to  repent;   2.  That  every  man  is 
dependent  on  the  Holy  Spirit  for  repentance ;  3.  That 
obligation  and  dependence  in  the  act  of  repenting  are    . 
mutually  consistent."     Or  you  propose  to  prove  nega-^^ft 
tively  three  things :  "1.  That  no  man  can  free  himself     ^^^y 
from  the  duty  of   repentance;    2.  That  no  man  will         (\tL 
repent  while   unregenerated  by  the  Holy  Ghost;    3. 
That  duty  and  dependence  in  the  matter  of  repenting       /— 
are  not  contradictory."      Or  you  propose  to  answer      (  A  / 
three  inquiries :    "  1.  Is  the  obligation  io  repent  uni-       ^     # 
veisal?   2.  Is  divine  interposition  indispensable  to  se-      ^y^ 
cure  repentance?     3.  Are  dependence  and  obligation     r  vv 
in  repentance  consonant  with  each  other?"     Or  you 
suggest  as  the   theme  of   remark  three  topics 


n 


Man's  responsibility  for  his  own  repentance  ;  2.  Man's      hj^i 
dependence  on  God  for  repentance ;  3.  The  relation  of       /  J  ■ 
repentance  as  a  duty  to  repentance  as  a  gift."     By  the       LM<^ 
supposition,  your  ideal  of  the  discourse  is  still  sub- 
stantially imchanged.     But,  from  variations  in  the  form 
of  statement,  you  obtain  four  additional  varieties  of 


^  .♦  * 
"  *  ^ 


«k    .• 


v^\ 


r334  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [lect.  xxni 

proposition.  One  is  affirmative ;  one  is  negative ;  one 
is  interrogative ;  one  is  declarative ;  and  all  are  plural 
in  form;  Can  you  not  conceive  of  precisely  the  same 
substance  of  discourse  as  coming  under  every  one  of 
these  twelve  varieties  of  form  in  proposition  ?  Yet  is 
it  not  plain  that  it  would  by  no  means  be  a  matter  of 
indifference  which  form  should  head  the  discussion  ? 

(6)  Yet  it  is  necessary  to  remark,  further,  that  a 
choice  from  among  these  fundamental  varieties  of 
proposition  will  not  necessarily  insure  a  perfect  state- 
ment of  a  theme.  In  a  good  proposition  every  word  is 
vital  to  the  structure.  The  locality  of  every  word  is  of 
moment  to  the  whole.  The  relations  of  each  word  to 
every  other,  the  collocation  of  words  into  clauses,  the 
number  of  words,  and  the  syntax  of  the  whole  are 
essential  subjects  of  criticism  in  the  construction.  A 
proposition  is  the  embodiment  of  emphasis :  it  is  all 
emphatic.  Minutice  of  style,  therefore,  must  often  be 
considered  in  its  making,  which  criticism  can  not  de- 
termine by  rules  laid  down  in  advance.  We  must 
have  the  case  in  hand  in  order  to  frame  the  de- 
cision of  taste.  A  preacher  needs,  therefore,  that 
state  of  mental  culture,  and  that  degree  of  practice  in 
stating  themes  of  sermons,  which  shall  enable  him  to 
frame  his  propositions  with  unconscious  skill,  as  a  good 
writer  constructs  all  other  composition.  All  that 
criticism  can  do  in  anticipation  of  the  work  is  to  ob- 
serve, as  we  have  now  done,  the  fundamental  varieties 
of  form  in  propositions,  and  then  to  add  certain  general 
principles  for  the  regulation  of  good  taste  in  the  choice 
from  among  tLem. 


5/  /"/yU^  ^---^  ""^^^ 


LECTURE  XXIV. 

THE  PROPOSITION:   SIMPLICITY. 

2d,  Having  considered  the  fundamental  distinctions 
of  form  in  proposition,  let  us,  in  the  second  place, 
observe  certain  principles  which  should  regulate  their 
forms. 

(1)  The  form  of  a  proposition  should  be  charac- 
terized by  as  great  a  degree  of  simplicity  as  is  con- 
sistent with  a  full  statement.  The  prime  virtue  in  a 
perfect  statement  of  any  thing  is  its  simplicity.  In 
such  a  process  we  require  nothing  extraordinary,  no 
ambitious  strain  of  style,  no  imaginative  garnish,  no 
affectation  of  an  excellence.  The  verdict  of  centuries 
upon  the  quality  before  us  is  packed  into  the  formula 
of  the  oath  administered  by  civilized  courts  to  witr- 
nesses.  Just  such,  also,  is  the  character  of  a  perfect 
proposition.  We  give  a  faultless  description  of  it  in 
saying  it  is  a  statement,  a  full  statement,  and  nothing 
but  a  statement,  of  the  thing  in  hand. 

Notice,  in  the  first  place,  that,  in  framing  such  a 
piopObition,  we  must  especially  avoid  words  of  unintel- 
ligible or  doubtful  meaning  to  the  hearers.  Amcng 
other  words  of  this  class  may  be  specified  the  technical 
vocabulary  of  natural  science.  A  college  professor,  in 
a  discourse  on  "certain  mineralogical  illustrations  oi 
character,"  sacrificed  classic  English  to  the  nomencia 


336  ,     THE  THEORY  OP  PBBACHINQ.        [lbot.  xxit, 

ture  of  science  in  the  structure  of  nearly  all  the  state- 
ments of  the  divisions.  They  are  these :  1.  The  trans- 
parent character;  2.  The  hydrophanous  character;  3» 
The  semitransparent  character;  4.  The  translucent 
,character  \  5.  The  doubly-refracting  character ;  6.  The 

>  •  ^'*^  'phosphorescent  character ;  7.  The  dichroic  character ; 

i^jSi!>  '^^®  chS^toyant  character ;  9.  The  irised  or  pavonine 
character ;  10.  The  opaque  character.  Scarcely  one  of 
these  forms  of  statement,  except  the  first,  is  intelligible 
outside  of  a  mineralogical  cabinet.  A  preacher  should 
not  be  ashamed  to  confess  the  weakness  of  wishing  to 
be  understood.  The  best  apology  for  the  sermon  in 
question  —  and  the  apology  had  some  force  —  was  that 
it  was  preached  in  a  college  chapel,  to  hearers  who 
were  daily  frequenting  the  cabinet  of  minerals,  and, 
therefore,  by  the  majority  of  them,  it  was  understood. 
It  may  be,  that,  before  such  an  audience,  its  scientific 
labels  gave  piquancy  to  the  train  of  thought.  Still  the 
dialect  of  preaching  should  be  the  dialect  of  literature 
as  distinct  from  science.  The  taste  of  scholarship,  not 
that  of  the  laboratory  or  the  museum,  should  control  its 
diction.  Such  a  taste  will  prescribe  a  simplicity  which 
will  eject  from  propositions  and  divisions  every  thing 
but  the  purest  and  simplest  English. 

^^         On  the  same  principle,  we  should  also  avoid  in  the 

W  /         structure   of  propositions  an  abstrnsft   pTiilnRnpTn'pAljgn. 

/  cabulary.  One  offers  as  a  proposition  "  the  subjectire 
-ground  of  justification."  The  truth  which  he  discusses 
is  "faith  considered  as  a  condition  of  salvation."  Why 
not  call  it  so,  and  be  understood?  Another  proposes 
to  discourse  upon  the  "ethical  laws  of  Christianity." 
The  subject  turns  out  to  be  "  the  excellence  of  Christ's 
morality  over  that  of  other  religions."  Why  not  say  this, 
and  speak  to  the  good  sense  of  nine-t  mths  of  the  hearers? 


.Q^ 


LROT.  XXIV.]     THE  PROPOSITION :   SIMPLICITY  337 

A  third  indicates  as  his  subject,  "  the  norm  of  sanotifica- 
tion."  This  is  getting  into  deeper  water.  The  discus- 
sion resolves  itself  into  an  illustration  of  this  principle, 
that  "grace  grows  by  exercise."  Why  not  have  the 
courage  to  accept  this  ?  It  is  a  gem  of  a  subject.  What 
is  added  to  it  by  starching  the  proposition  to  the  prim- 
ness and  pedantry  of  a  philosophical  diction  in  which 
nobody  recognizes  the  beautiful  and  friendly  truth? 
If  we  must  have  the  general  rather  than  the  more 
sj>ecific  proposition,  why  talk  of  the  "  norm  "  of  a  thing, 
when  we  have  such  stanch  old  words  as  "law,"  and 
"rule,"  and  "principle"?  Even  the  derivatives  " nor 
mal "  and  "  abnormal  "  are  barely  tolerable  in  a  popu- 
lar dialect ;  but  the  root  "  norm "  is  an  affectation  of 
philosophical  pedantry  which  old  Roger  Ascham  would 
have  flung  from  him  as  an  "inkhorn  term"  which 
scholasticism  had  "  caught  by  the  tail." 

Again :  the  principle  before  us  should  exclude  from^^^JV  / 
propositions  many  of  the  technical  terms  of  theology  jl 
A  large  proportion  of  theological  technicalities  will 
almost  necessarily  be  unintelligible  to  some  hearers,  and 
of  doubtful  meaning  to  others.  From  time  immemorial 
they  have  burdened  the  dialect  of  the  pulpit.  Espe- 
cially in  the  statement  of  subjects,  the  dialect  needed 
in  the  pulpit  is  not  that  of  the  university,  but  the  cul- 
tured dialect  of  common  life  and  common  men.  Some 
masters  of  language  can  do  in  speech  what  masters 
cf  painting  do  in  colors,  —  make  varieties  illustrate 
each  other.  Rufus  Choate  could  make  the  technicali- 
ties of  law  and  of  literature  deepen  and  adorn  the 
thoughts,  which,  for  the  most  part,  he  expressed  in 
language  level  to  the  minds  of  a  miscellaneous  jury. 
So  there  are  princes  of  expression  in  the  pulpit,  who 
can  make  the  technicalities  of   theology  enrich  the 


/ 


838  JTHE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [leot.  xxit 

materials  of  their  sermons,  and  at  the  same  time 
make  the  popular  elements  of  their  style  illimiinate  and 
interpret  those  technicalities.  The  effect  is  that  the 
hearer  is  sensible  of  a  range  of  thought  and  style  above 
his  own  use,  yet  not  above  his  own  comprehension.  To 
the  extent  of  a  preacher's  power  to  produce  this  illumi- 
nated compound  of  opposites  in  style,  he  may  safely 
emj)loy  the  dialect  of  theological  schools.  But,  beyond 
the  limit  of  that  power,  no  man  can  hope  to  be  under- 
stood in  the  ^use  of  that  dialect,  except  by  the  rare 
audiences  who  have  been  trained  by  a  quarter  of  a 
century  of  technically  dogmatic  preaching.  The  num- 
ber of  such  audiences  in  our  day  may  be  reckoned  on 
one's  fingers. 

Aside  from  such  exceptions,  the  best  general  test  by 
which  to  admit  or  to  exclude  the  technical  style  of 
theology  in  framing  the  propositions  of  sermons  is  that 
of  the  degree  of  its  assimilation  to  the  language  of  the 
Scriptures.  The  sacred  books  of  a  reading  nation 
become,  almost  of  necessity,  a  literary  standard  to  that 
nation.  Thus  the  Scriptures  have  become  throughout 
Christendom,  so  far  as  the  people  are  permitted  and 
taught  to  read  them,  a  standard  of  literary  intelligence. 
The  vocabulary  of  the  Scriptures  forms  the  greater 
part  of  the  vocabulary  of  such  a  people  in  all  their 
expression  of  dignified  thought.  In  biblical  connec- 
tions and  for  biblical  uses  the  people  understand  words 
which  they  never  use,  and  might  never  understand,  in 
different  connections.  As  a  consequence,  the  religious 
vocabulary  of  a  people,  as  in  Great  Britain  and  Ger- 
many and  America,  is  by  several  degrees  more  elevated 
than  their  secular  vocabulary. 

At  the  same  time,  it  is  true  that  the  Scriptures  have 
given  to  theological  science  some  of  its  most  salient 


LECT.  XXIV.]     THE  PROPOSITION :    SIMPLICITY.  339 

phraseology.  The  scholastic  theologian  often  finds,  that, 
even  for  scientific  use,  he  can  not  improve  upon  the  style 
of  the  Bible.  A  preacher,  therefore,  will  commonly  be 
on  safe  ground,  as  it  respects  the  intelligibility  of  his 
style  to  the  people,  if  he  employs  in  the  construction  of 
his  propositions  and  divisions  only  those  technicalitiea 
of  theology  which  the  Bible  has  originated,  and  omits 
itiose  which  are  the  pure  product  of  the  schools.  On 
this  principle,  therefore,  we  do  not  scruple  to  employ 
such  technicalities  of  theology  as  "redemption,"  "jus-, 
tification,"  "predestination,"  "foreknowledge,"  and 
similar  terms  which  a  Christianized  people  can  not  but 
understand. 

But  how  stands  the  case  with  certain  other  techni- 
calities of  theology?  Is  it  wise  to  propose  as  the 
theme  of  a  sermon  "  the  free  moral  agency  of  man  "  ?  I 
think  not.  Why?  Because  it  is  scholastic  in  its  origin 
and  in  its  associations;  and  its  scholasticism  is  not 
relieved  by  any  thing  that  the  Bible  has  to  say  on  the 
subject.  What,  then,  can  we  substitute  for  it?  Such 
a  statement  as  this,  —  "  man's  responsibility  for  his  own 
character."  It  is  worthy  of  note,  on  all  topics  involv- 
ing the  question  of  freewill,  that  the  Scriptures  never 
directly  discuss  that  question.  They  teach  responsibili- 
ty, and  stop  there.  The  rest  is  left  to  human  conscious- 
ness. Ability,  freedom,  fate,  necessity,  —  the  whole 
group  of  topics  with  which  philosophy  in  all  ages  has 
dealt  so  freely, — are  not  treated  in  the  Bible.  We  may 
wisely  follow  its  example  in  the  selection  and  statement 
of  the  themes  of  sermons.  We  gain  thus  the  advantage 
which  the  Bible  gains  by  its  policy,  —  the  support  of 
every  man's  consciousness.  Responsibility  every  man 
feels  conscious  of:  ability  in  certain  connections  no 
man  feels  conscious  of.     It  matters  little  whether  men 


^ 


/ 


340  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [leot.  xxit 

believe  in  their  moral  freedom  or  not :  their  conscious- 
ness of  responsibility  remains  intact  on  either  hypothesis. 
That  is,  men  are  conscious,  not  of  ability  directly,  but  of 
that  which  implies  ability  The  policy  of  the  inspired 
preachers  is  to  throw  the  whole  brunt  of  the  question 
of  ability  upon  "the!  consciousnesa^f^  responsibility 
Back  oPthat  they  never  go.  Therefore  I  would  never 
discuss  directly  the  subject  of  moral  freedom  in  the 
pulpit. 

Is  it  desirable  to  propose  as  a  subject  "  the  doctrine 
of  original  sin,"  or  "  the  imputation  of  Adam's  sin  toiis-^ 
posterity  "  ?  I  think  not.  This  phraseology  is  the  prod- 
uct of  the  school  alone.  Common  usage  has  never 
adopted  it :  men  never  confess  conviction  of  sin  by  the 
use  of  it.  The  Scriptures  do  not  contain  it,  nor  do 
they  give  any  such  prominence  to  the  truth  which  the 
schoolmen  convey  by  it  as  to  have  exalted  and  illumi- 
nated it  in  the  intelligence  of  the  people.  What,  then, 
can  we  substitute  for  it  ?  Such  a  form  of  proposition 
as  this,  "  the  connection  of  the  sinfulness  of  the  race 
with  the  fall  of  Adam,"  or  the  inquiry,  "  How  has  the 
fall  in  Eden  affected  the  character  of  mankind?  "  The 
subject  as  thus  expressed  is  a  biblical  theme.  It  can 
be  discussed,  if  need  be,  without  reference  to  the  his 
toric  controversies  on  the  subject. 

The  same  principle  should  be  applied  to  the  phrase 
"total  depravity"  and  to  that  of  "the  trinity  of 
_ persons  in  the  Godhead."  Why  is  it,  that  if  you  adopt 
as  the  proposition  of  a  sermon  a  statement  containing 
the  phrase  "total  depravity,"  or  that  of  "three  per- 
sons in  the  Godhead,"  you  must  exhaust  one-half  of 
your  sermon  to  explain  what  the  doctrine  is  not  ?  This 
has  become  the  stereotyped  method  of  the  pulpit  of 
New  England  ifi    discoursing   on   these   doctrines,  if 


cjccT.  XXIV.]     THE  PROPOSITION :    SIMPLICITY.  841 

they  are  presented  under  the  shelter  of  these  technical 
statements.  What,  then,  can  we  substitute  for  these 
scholastic  statements  of  the  doctrines?  Such  forms  of 
proposition  as  these,  that  "  man  is  by  nature  destitute 
of  holiness ; "  or,  "  that  the  moral  nature  of  man  is  sinful 
and  only  sinful ;  "  or,  "  What  is  the  natural  character  of 
man?"  that  "God  exists  as  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Ghost ; "  or,  "  that  the  Scriptures  teach  a  threefold  dis- 
tinction in  the  being  of  God ;  "  or,  "  What  is  the  scrip- 
tural doct-rine  of  the  mode  of  divine  existence?" 

At  this  point  should  be  noticed  a  peril  to  which 
preachers  may  expose  themselves  through  inattention 
to  the  growth  of  certain  forms  of  statement  in  their 
own  minds.  Statements  may  be  obscure  to  hearers, 
which  meditation  has  rendered  elementary  to  preachers. 
Studious  preachers  are  studious  of  truth  in  its  philo- 
sophical relations.  Themes  of  sermons,  therefore,  will 
often  suggest  themselves  in  a  philosophical  dialect.  In 
that  form  their  obscurity  to  hearers  may  escape  the 
preacher's  detection.  Abstractions,  to  a  mind  which 
feeds  upon  them,  become  like  concrete  realities.  But, 
for  the  purposes  of  discourse  to  an  audience,  there  is 
great  power  and  great  beauty  in  calling  things  by  their 
simple  names.  Call  water,  water,  and  fire,  fire,  remem- 
bering alwpvs  that  the  first  object  of  language  is  to  be 
understood. 

In  the  second  place,  the  simplicity  of  propositions 
may  be  promoted  by  avoiding  figurative  forms  of  state- 
ment. We  have  before  observed,  that  a  proposition  is 
a  statement,  and  notning  more.  If  so,  it  is  not  an 
explanation,  it  is  not  an  appeal,  it  is  not  an  illustration, 
it  is  not  primarily  an  argument :  therefore  the  defect 
in  a  figurative  proposition  is  that  it  is  not  the  simplest 
form  of  statement.    A  figure  may  give  clearness  to  an 


342  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [uicn.  xxiT 

explanation,  force  to  an  argument,  vividness  to  an  illus^ 
tration,  eloquence  to  an  appeal,  but  not  simplicity  to  a 
statement.  It  may  therefore  be  more  pertinent  any- 
where else  in  a  sermon  than  in  the  statement  of  a  propo- 
sition or  division.  Why  is  a  metaphorical  description 
of  a  crime  not  allowable  in  the  enactment  of  criminal 
law  ?  Why  is  a  metaphorical  boundary  of  real  estate 
not  pertinent  in  a  title-deed?  For  a  similar  reason, 
figure  is  not  becoming  in  a  proposition.  Literalness  is 
essential  to  simplicity  in  any  thing  which  professes  to 
be  a  statement,  and  nothing  more. 

It  has  been  sometimes  advised  that  a  proposition 
should  be  so  framed  as  to  be  a  good  title  to  a  sermon 
if  it  were  printed.  This  is  by  no  means  a  safe  criterion. 
A  good  proposition,  it  is  true,  may  be  a  good  title ;  but 
a  good  title  may  not  be  a  simple  proposition.  A  title 
may  be  only  a  hint  of  the  contents  of  a  discourse : 
therefore  it  may  be  imaginative.  The  Rev.  Nehemiah 
Adams,  D.D.,  of  Boston,  delivered  a  sermon  on  the 
introduction  of  the  Cochituate  water  into  the  city,  and 
printed  it  under  the  beautifully  significant  title ;  "A 
Song  of  the  Well."  What  would  that  title  have  been 
worth  as  a  proposition?  A  metaphorical  hint  of  a 
theme  is  not  a  simple  statement  of  it. 

Figurative  propositions  are  sometimes  vindicated  on 
the  ground  of  their  biblical  origin.  Simeon,  on  the 
text,  "  I  am  the  vine,  ye  are  the  branches,"  advances 
the  proposition,  "  God's  treatment  of  us  as  branches  of 
the  true  vine ; "  and  from  the  text,  "  He  that  eateth  and 
drinketh  unworthily  eateth  and  drinketh  damnation 
to  himself,"  he  derives  the  proposition,  "eating  aid 
drinking  our  damnation."  These  examples  will  recall 
to  you  a  multitude  of  sermons  in  which  the  statements 
of  the  subjects  emh)dy  biblical  figures ;  such  as  "  Baal," 


LECT.  XXIV.]     THE  PROPOSITION:    SIMPLICITY.  B43 

"Mammon,"  "the  flesh,"  "the  old  man,"  and  other 
scriptural  modes  of  repre?>enting  sin  or  its  objects; 
and  such  as  "Zion,"  "Israel,"  "Jerusalem,"  "The 
walls  of  Zion,"  and  other  scriptural  modes  of  indicat- 
ing the  Church.  Such  figurative  statements  are  not 
obsolescent  in  the  modern  pulpit.  A  discourse  was 
preached  within  a  few  years  on  the  subject  of  Sam- 
son's riddle,  the  divisions  of  which  were  :  (1)  There 
are  lions  in  every  man's  path ;  2.  The  slaying  of  these 
lions  yields  the  sweetest  rewards  of  life. 

Is  the  argument  for  such  propositions  and  divisions, 
that  they  are  often  founded  upon  figurative  texts,  an 
adequate  defense  of  them  ?  Surely  not,  if  they  are  not 
intrinsically  the  best  fitted  to  the  purpose  of  a  simple 
statement  of  the  subjects  of  discourse.  Why  employ 
biblical  poetry  for  a  literal  purpose,  rather  than  any 
other  poetry  ?  The  extreme  of  ill  taste  to  which  the 
usage  exposes  a  preacher  is  illustrated  in  the  following 
instance.  A  preacher  in  Massachusetts,  a  few  years 
ago,  wished  to  present  the  growth  in  a  Christian 
character  in  its  several  phases  from  conversion  to  a 
mature  Christian  experience.  He  defined  three  phases, 
which  he  stated  in  his  three  divisions  thus :  1.  At  the 
beginning  of  the  Christian  life  we  are  all  babes  in 
Christ;  2.  As  we  advance  in  experience  we  become 
young  men,  of  whom  the  Apostle  says  "  Ye  are  strong ;  '* 
3.  In  the  final  stages  of  our  growth  we  all  become 
mothers  in  Israel.  What  defect  has  this  example 
which  many  others  by  more  tasteful  preachers  have  not  / 
in  less  degree  ?  / 

Figurative  propositions  and  divisions  are  often  de- 
fended on  the  ground  that  the  usage  of  the  pulpit  has 
indulged  in  them  from  time  immemorial.  They  have, 
in  the  minds  of  some,  the  prestige  of  a  venerable  an- 


/ 


344  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [ueoj'   xdv. 

tiquity.  It  is  not  always  easy  to  reply  to  this  saintly 
predilection  for  the  antiquities  of  the  pulpit.  We 
should  judge  of  it  as  men  of  sense  rather  than  men  of 
feeling.  Remember  that  preaching  is  a  business.  Its 
object  is  an  immediate  object,  a  pressing  object:  it  is 
the  business  of  an  emergency.  Like  any  other  such 
business,  it  can  not  be  more  fatally  embarrassed  than 
by  wrapping  it  in  the  folds  of  romantic  feeling. 

Witness  the  unreal,  often  the  dreamy,  descriptions  of 
Christian  experience  by  Christian  laymen  who  speak 
glibly  in  the  use  of  biblical  figures  in  meetings  for 
prayer  and  conference.  Why  do  they  talk  on  religious 
subjects  in  a  dialect  the  like  of  which  they  never  use 
on  any  other  subject?  Why  clothe  religious  thought 
in  metaphorical  forms  such  as  they  would  never  think 
of  imitatiQg  in  the  concerns  of  business  ?  One  reason 
is  that  they  take  the  infection  from  the  pulpit.  If 
preachers  envelop  religious  ideas  in  figure,  to  the  detri- 
ment of  the  business-like  character  of  preaching,  hearers 
will  bury  their  own  religious  experience  under  the  same 
verbiage;  and  how  much  of  it  is  a  reality  and  how 
much  romance,  they  may  never  know.  This  preachers 
do  when  they  put  propositions  into  figurative  forms.  If 
any  thing  is  a  business  in  the  pulpit,  and  ought  to  take 
on  the  forms  of  plain,  business-like  speech,  it  is  that 
calm  unpoetic  part  of  a  sermon  in  which  a  preacher  has 
merely  to  tell  an  audience  what  he  proposes  to  talk 
about.  There,  if  nowhere  else,  we  should  come  at  the 
intelligence  of  hearers  by  the  shortest,  plainest,  most 
natural,  and  hence  most  literal  way.  We  should  use 
the  dialect  of  our  own  times,  not  that  of  Spenser  or 
Chaucer,  and  as  little  that  of  Baxter  and  John  Howe. 
Instead  of  seeking  to  throw  around  a  proposition  the 
drapery  of   a  venerable  homiletio  usage,   we  should 


LKOT.  XXIV.]     THE  PROPOSITION :    SIMPLICITY.  845 

rather  think  of  the  mathematical  definition  of  a  straight 
line. 

Figurative  propositions  Lnd  divisions  are  sometimes 
vindicated  on  the  ground  of  their  raciness.  One 
Treacher,  martial  in  his  tastes,  proposes  as  his  theme 
"  the  great  battle  of  the  Lord  Almighty."  Another,  in 
more  feminine  mood,  proposes  to  contemplate  "  the  rain- 
bow of  divine  promise."  A  third,  of  more  practical 
turn,  asks  attention  to  "  the  sin  of  being  a  stumbling- 
blcck.''  A  fourth,  whose  tastes  incline  to  science,  sug- 
gests "  the  anaesthetic  power  of  the  world  over  Christian 
hearts."  A  fifth  canvasses  the  signs  of  the  times,  and 
proposes  "the  pioneer  character  of  the  church."  A 
sixth  meditates  at  eventide,  and  invites  to  "  a  walk  about 
Zion."  These,  and  an  interminable  catalogue  like  them, 
many  would  defend  as  being  pithy  forms  of  statement. 
They  prick  curiosity:  they  please  fancy.  True;  but 
does  this  shield  them  from  the  censure  of  good  taste  ?  I 
think  not;  because,  valuable  as  raciness  of  statement 
often  is,  it  ought  not  to  take  the  precedence  of  simpli- 
city. In  stating  any  business  in  hand,  raciness  should 
be  sought  in  plainness  of  speech  and  directness  in  com- 
ing to  the  point.     Figurative  hints  are  out  of  place. 

The  taste  which  chooses  figurative  propositions  and 
divisions  is  perilous  to  chasteness  of  style  in  other  re- 
spects. A  writer  is  never  safe  who  indulges  himself  in 
one  habit  hostile  to  good  taste.  A  certain  integrity 
characterizes  the  decisions  of  good  taste.  Joubert  says 
that  it  is  "the  literary  conscience  of  the  soul."  He 
that  is  guilty  in  one  point  is  guilty  in  all.  You  can 
never  know  to  what  friskiness  of  rhetorical  judgment 
you  may  be  tempted,  if  you  tolerate  in  yourself  one 
habit  of  conscious  indifference  to  the  claims  of  taste,  oi 
a  single  recognitipu  of  eccentric  standards  of  taste. 


i7; 


346  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [lect.  xxrr 

Id  the  tliird  place,  the  simplicity  of  propositions  and 
divisions  requires  that  they  should  not  be  stated  il  the 
language  of  popular  proverbs.  "Honesty  is  the  best 
policy ;  "  "A  penny  saved  is  a  penny  earned ;  "  "  God 
helps  those  who  help  themselves ; "  "  In  the  midst  of  life 
we  are  in  death;"  —  why  should  not  these  be  made  tho 
propositions  of  sermons?  Christian  discourses  might 
be  constructed  on  any  one  of  them.  But,  because  they 
are  familiar  proverbs,  they  have  an  atmosphere  about 
them  which  is  not  kindred  to  that  of  simple  speech. 
They  are  the  pert  remarks  of  the  highway.  Their  ori- 
ginal dignity  is  gone,  and  now  they  are  pedestrian  and 
dusty.  Often  they  are  the  make-weights  of  pleasantry. 
A  suspicion  of  eccentricity  is  awakened  by  their  obtru- 
sion as  propositions  of  sermons.  Eccentricity  is  not 
simplicity. 

In  the  fourth  place,  simplicity  in  propositions  and 
divisions  demands  still  more  imperatively  the  exclu- 
sion  of  fantastic  forms  of  statement.  From  the  text  m 
Ezekiel  respecting  "the  wheels"  and  the  "living  crea- 
tures," one  preacher  derived  the  proposition,  "  the 
wheels  of  providence."  The  Rev.  Parson  Moody  of 
Boston,  on  the  text,  "  They  know  not  what  they  do," 
preached  on  the  proposition,  "when  men  know  not 
what  to  do,  they  should  be  careful  not  to  do  they  kno"w 
not  what."  On  the  text,  "  This  year  thou  shalt  die," 
a  quaint  preacher  in  Hopkinton,  Mass.,  once  discoursed 
on  tliis  proposition,  "  nobody  in  Hopkinton  will  die  this 
year." 

We  feel  without  comment  the  unseemliness  of  these 
propositions.  But  why  are  they  not  good  forms  of 
statement?  "What  canon  or  instinct  of  good  taste  do 
they  offend  ?  I  answer,  that  which  requires  simplicity 
in^  the  statement  of  a  theme.     Earnest  minds,  pressed 


uECT.  xxrv.]     THE  PROPOSITION :    SIMPLICITY.  '    347 

by  the  duty  of  the  pulpit  as  that  of  an  exigency,  have 
neither  time  nor  taste  for  the  creation  of  such  sports  of 
ingenuity. 

Finally,  simplicity  in  propositions  and  divisions  re- 
squires  the  avoidance  of  extreme  paradox  in  their  forms 
of  statement.  A  slight  paradox  is  not  inconsistent  with 
ft  calm  statement,  but  an  extreme  paradox  implies  ex- 
cited statement.  Simeon  has  a  sermon  on  "the  mutual 
abhorrence  of  God  and  sinners."  This  is  not  true. 
It  sets  a  thoughtful  hearer  to  recalling  the  text,  "  God 
commendeth  his  love  toward  us,  in  that,  while  we  were 
yet  sinners,  Christ  died  for  us."  Whitefield  has  a  dis- 
course on  the  proposition,  "persecution  is  the  lot  of 
every  Christian."  Either  this  is  not  true,  or  the  vast 
majority  of  the  Christian  Church  are  hypocrites.  Wil- 
liam Jay  expresses  the  truth  more  simply  when  he  pro- 
poses to  consider  that  "  a  Christian  is  not  apt  to  be  a 
favorite  with  the  world."  The  llev.  Dr.  Bushnell  has 
published  a  sermon,  the  proposition  of  which  is,  in  sub- 
stance, "  men  are  bound  to  do  what  they  can  not  do." 
This  is  not  true  in  any  sense  in  which  the  popular  mind 
will  understand  the  language.  You  must  either  make 
the  language  figurative,  or  put  into  it  one  of  the  tech- 
nicalities of  polemic  theology  to  make  it  true  in  any 
sense. 

Some  of  these  examples  of  propositions  will  be  vin- 
dicated by  some  preachers,  on  the  ground  that  they  are 
fair  paraphrases  of  certain  biblical  texts.  Thus,  in 
the  prophecy  of  Zechariah,  it  is  said  of  God,  "  My  soul 
loathed  them,  and  their  soul  also  abhorred  me."  This 
certainly  looks  like  "  mutual  abhorrence  between  God 
and  sinners."  Paul  affirms,  "  All  that  will  live  godly 
in  Christ  Jesus  shall  suffer  persecution."  This  appears 
to  sustain  Whitefield.     Doubtless,  texts  enough  can  be 


348  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [uBcr.  xxiv. 

found  in  the  Scriptures,  which,  when  woven  together 
with  adroit  theologic  fingers,  make  out  an  express 
command  to  men  to  do  what  thej  can  not  do.  Dr. 
Bushnell's  use  of  his  text  to  this  effect  is  not  without 
plausibility.  The  inquiry,  then,  is  a  fair  one  >  —  does  not 
the  objection  which  rhetoric  urges  against  such  proposi- 
tions lie  with  equal  force  against  these  biblical  texts  ? 
I  answer,  No :  dimply  because  texts  are  not  necessarily 
absolute  propositions.  Texts  are  limited  by  other 
texts,  interpreted  by  contexts,  illumined  by  occasions 
and  events,  qualified  by  the  characters  concerned  in 
their  delivery.  Isolate  them,  as  propositions  are  isolat- 
ed, from  these  interpretive  surroundings,  and  often 
they  are  not  true.  Texts,  therefore,  are  not  inspired 
models  of  propositions. 

One  object  of  a  proposition  often  is  to  reduce  to  a 
literal  and  independent  statement  the  truth  which  a 
text  presents  half  buried  in  intricate  relations.  To 
translate  the  poetry  of  a  text  into  logical  prose,  to  ex- 
change the  metaphor  of  a  text  for  the  literalism  of 
science,  to  evolve  the  simplicity  of  a  text  from  the 
labyrinth  of  its  antecedents,  to  transport  the  germ  of  a 
text  from  an  oriental  to  an  occidental  atmosphere, — 
these  are  often  the  very  purposes  of  propositions.  Sim- 
plicity requires  them,  as  it  requires  that  diamonds 
should  be  polished,  not  worn  in  the  rough. 


LECTURE  XXV. 

THE  PEOPOSITION :  BBEVITY,  SPECEPICNESS,  ELEGANOB, 
ITS  PREFACE. 

(2)  Passing  now  from  simplicity  in  propositions,  let    ><"  " 
us  observe  a  second  principle  affecting  their  qualities ; 
namely,  that  a  proposition  should  be  as  brief  as  it  may     _    "" 
be,  consistently  with  clearness.     A  French  critic  says  j[h^ 

that  "genuine  depth  comes  from  concentrated  ideas."  ^ 

So  of  propositions:   the  deepest,  the  truest,  the  most 
magnetic  are  susceptible  of  compactness  in  form. 

In  the  first  place,  propositions  are  often  expanded  ^ 
by  needless  synonyms.  "The  willfulness  and  per- 
verseness  of  sin "  is  one  of  Dr.  Payson's  proposi- 
tions. "  The  danger  of  obstinate  and  willful  disobedi- 
ence "is  a  theme  proposed  by  Simeon.  "The  nature (M 
and  design  of  a  Christian  Church  "  is  a  subject  of  one  ^ 
of  Dr.  Lathrop^  sermons.  What  is  the  evil  of  these 
couples  of  words  ?  They  dilute  the  thought  bey  nd  the 
demand  of  perspicuity.  Beyond  this  demand,  words 
are  a  solvent  of  thought.  The  more,  the  weaker. 
We  judge  thought  by  weight,  not  by  bulk.  Again: 
needless  synonyms  may  excite  false  expectations  of 
the  range  of  a  discussion.  "The  willfulness  and  per- 
verseness  of  sin "  suggests,  does  it  not,  a  double  aim ; 
yet  the  discussion  has  but  one.  From  the  nature 
of  the  case  no  words  employed  in  a  proposition  can  be 

349    . 


850  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lect.  xxv 

unimportant.  Theoretically  every  word  is  emphatic. 
Practically  every  word  will  attract  attention.  With 
no  theory  of  criticism  on  the  subject,  hearers  will  by 
instinct  take  every  word  as  meaning  someth^Jig  which 
3an  not  be  spared.  Before  using  a  word,  therefore,  in 
a  proposition,  find  a  use  foi  it. 

In  the  second  place,  we  notice  that  the  objections  are 
similar  to  the  expansion  of  propositions  by  needless 
epithets.  "  Man'3  proud  contempt  of  God  "  is  one  of 
Simeon's  subjects.  What  is  the  force  of  the  epithet  ? 
What  weight  does  it  carry  ?  Can  contempt  of  God  be 
otherwise  than  proud?  Does  the  preacher  mean  to 
discuss  different  kinds  of  sinful  contempt?  If  not, 
what  is  the  purpose  of  the  epithet  ?  On  the  contrary, 
does  not  a  nice  discernment  of  good  taste  see  a  force 
in  the  substantive  alone,  from  which  the  epithet  makes 
a  positive  deduction?  "Contempt  of  God"  expresses 
more  than  "proud  contempt  of  God."  Compression 
itself  gives  force  to  thought,  as  it  does  to  a  bullet.  Epi- 
thets, nevertheless,  are  sometimes  necessary  to  strength- 
en a  proposition.  The  vast  majority  of  epithets  used 
in  propositions  are  designed  to  produce  this  intensive 
effect.  Preachers  employ  them  in  the  involuntary 
effort  to  intensify  thought.  The  practical  question, 
therefore,  is  when  to  use  them,  and  when  not.  The 
discrimination  of  the  preacher  must  answer.  This  may 
be  assisted  by  ot>serving  three  principles. 

One  is,  that,  if  accuracy  of  statement  requires  an  epi* 
thet,  it  is  a  necessity.  Unqualified,  the  proposition  may 
b^  untrue.  Another  principle  is,  that,  if  an  epithet 
contains  the  characteristic  idea  of  the  sermon,  it  be- 
comes a  necessity  to  the  proposition.  "  The  greatest 
of  these  is  charity ; "  —  from  this  text,  a  sermon  was  once 
preached  on  "  the  incomparable   excellence  of  lev©  « 


\ 


LBOT.  XXV.]  THE  PROPOSITION :    BREVITY.  351 

Why  was  the  ep.chet  necessary?  Because  it  contained 
the  distinctive  idea  of  the  whole  discussion.  Such 
epithets  are  condensed  sentences.  They  are  the  dis-  / 
courses  in  miniature.  A  third  principle  is  that  the 
proposition  is  not  the  place  in  which  to  intensify  a 
subject  merely  for  rhetorical  impression.  To  do  that 
may  be  the  design  of  the  development  or  of  the  conclu 
Bion ;  but  the  purposes  of  mere  statement  limit  the  aim 
of  the  proposition.  "The  horrible  guilt  of  those  who 
strengthen  the  hands  of  the  wicked ; "  "  The  awful 
doom  of  the  finally  impenitent;"  "The  glorious  re- 
wards of  the  righteous," — do  you  not  perceive,  that, 
in  these  examples,  the  epithets  have  no  definitive  val  iie  ? 
They  are  inserted  only  to  magnify  the  idea.  The  ac- 
curacy of  the  statement  does  not  demand  them,  ncr  is 
the  characteristic  thought  of  the  proposition  in  any  one 
of  them.  They  are  like  the  lens  of  a  magic-lantern, 
—  inserted  only  to  augment  the  diagram  behind.  The 
use  of  them  indicates  the  straining  of  style  to  express 
on  the  instant  and  at  first  sight  that  which  it  is  the 
province  of  the  discussion  to  develop  as  an  ultimate 
result.  They  put  the  whole  structure  out  of  true  per- 
spective. 

Again :  propositions  may  be  needlessly  expanded 
by  circuitous  or  indolent  grammatical  constructions. 
Which  of  the  two  following  forms  of  proposition  is 
the  more  forcible?  —  "Let  us  consider  the  duty  of 
believers  to  make  incessant  advances  in  holiness,  not- 
withstanding the  temptations  of  the  world,  the  trials 
of  Providence,  and  the  assaults  of  Satan ; "  "  Let  us 
consider  the  duty  of  Christians  to  use  the  conditions 
of  a  probationary  life  as  a  means  cf  growth  in  grace." 
For  the  purposes  of  a  statement  of  theme,  does  not 
the  latter  of  these  forms  express  all  that  is  requisite, 
and  express  it  the  more  forcibly  for  its  brevity  ? 


f 


352  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.         [lect.  xxt 

Further :  propositions  may  be  needlessly  diffuse 
through  repetition  in  varied  language.  If  any  single 
sentence  of  a  discourse  should  be  such  as  not  to  need 
varied  repetition,  it  is  the  proposition.  It  may  need 
repetition  to  make  sure  of  the  ear  of  the  hearer,  but 
should  never  be  repeated  by  variations  of  statement 
for  the  sake  of  his  understanding.  Yet^prolixity  from 
repetiti)n  is  an  inveterate  infirmity  of  the  pulpit.  It 
may  result  from  a  preacher's  want  of  clear  conceptioE 
of  his  theme.  A  foreign  critic  says,  that,  with  some 
writers,  style  grows  out  of  thoughts ;  with  others, 
thought  grows  out  of  style.  In  the  case  now  in  hand, 
the  preacher's  thought  grows  in  the  process  of  his 
anxious  experiments  in  trying  to  give  it  intelligible 
form.  The  thought  of  the  proposition  grows  out  of 
its  style.  The  same  labor  of  mental  apprenticeship  to 
a  subject  which  we  noticed  as  often  bungling  an  intro- 
duction produces,  also,  a  confused  proposition. 

The  subject  of  a  discourse  once  presented  here  for 
criticism,  when  it  was  denuded  of  its  mock  profound- 
ness, was  this,  "  long-continued  sin  hardens  the  moral 
sensibilities  of  the  sinner."  But  the  preacher  had  not 
distilled  it  in  his  own  mental  laboratory  down  to  tliis 
simple  residuum.  It  was  still  seething  and  sputtering 
in  the  crucible  of  his  own  thinking.  Said  he,  **Yoiir 
attention  is  invited  to  a  consideration  of  the  fact  that  a 
disregard  of  the  voice  of  duty,  if  long  continued  through 
a  series  of  many  years,  exerts  an  injurious  influence 
upon  the  entire  moral  man  ;  that  it  is  the  nature  of 
moral  evil  thus  to  infect  and  poison  man's  moral  being, 
producing  moral  disease  and  death;  that  a  violation 
of  the  moral  laws  of  our  being  tends  to  an  entire 
destruction  of  the  moral  sensibilities  and  to  a  degrada- 
tion of  all  that  distinguishes  man  as  a  subject  of  Gctd's 


LECT.  XXV.]  THE  PROPOSITION :   BREVITY.  853 

moral  government ;  and,  in  illustration  of  this  subject,  I 
remark  first,"  etc.  What  subject  ?  Who  could  divine 
it  at  the  first  guess  ? 

Prolix  repetition,  again,  may  result  from  a  certain 
mannerism  in  composing.  Some  writers  crave  rotun- 
dity of  style  for  all  important  statements.  They  are 
unconsciously  fascinated  by  fullness  of  sound  in  enun- 
ciation, —  by  what  Cicero  calls  the  ore  rotundo.  Their 
style,  therefore,  takes  on  the  corpulent  build  whenever 
an  emphatic  thought  is  to  be  Expressed.  I  select  an 
example  to  the  point,  from  Alison's  "History  of 
Europe."  He  is  introducing  a  discussion  of  the  prin- 
ciple of  human  progress,  which,  he  says,  lay  at  the 
foundation  of  the  French  Revolution.  He  announces 
his  purpose  as  follows:  "It  is  of  the  highest  impor- 
tance to  inquire  to  what  extent  this  principle  is  well- 
founded."  Here,  observe,  is  one  statement  of  his 
proposition.  But  he  proceeds :  "  to  examine  how  far 
it  is  consistent  with  the  experience  of  human  nature." 
This  is  a  second  statement.  But  he  adds:  "and  in 
what  degree  it  is  warranted  by  the  past  annals  of  man- 
kind." A  third  statement,  this,  of  the  same  propo- 
sition. One  thing  only  is  proposed  in  this  threefold 
form.  The  thought  is  entirely  clear,  but  as  clear  in  its 
first  statement  as  in  its  last,  and  more  clear  in  either 
one  than  in  three  statements.  The  writer  is  beguiled 
into  a  cumbrous  and  prolix  statement  by  the  sheer 
mannerism  of  a  rotund  style.  He  was  unconsciously 
straining  after  the  "  dignity  of  history."  Had  he  been 
colloquially  telling  a  friend  what  he  just  then  wished 
to  talk  aboutj  he  would  have  said  it,  probably,  in  one 
utterance  of  a  dozen  Saxon  words.  But,  because  he 
was  writing  history  for  generations  unborn,  he  must 
swell  his  utterance  into  this  trimountain  of  a  proposi- 
tion«  ^ 


-hv  .. 


5" 


354  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.         [user,  xxr 

/  Further:  prolix  repetition  sometimes  aiises  from  a 
false  conception  of  the  object  of  a  proposition.  The 
error  here  suggested  is  the  same  with  that  which  we 
have  noticed,  as  often  tempting  to  the  needless  use  of 
intensive  epithets  in  a  proposition.  It  is  that  preachers 
strive  to  make  propositions  rhetorically  impressive  in- 
stead of  lucidly  expressive  of  the  subjects.  The 
theme  may  be  clear:  the  speaker  knows  what  he  is 
about  to  discuss ;  but,  instead  of  making  it  clear  to  the 
hearer  in  the  proposition,  he  struggles  to  make  it  vivid. 
A  case  in  hand  will  best  illustrate  this.  A  plan  of  a 
sermon  once  presented  here  for  criticism  was  on  the 
subject  that  "  man  by  nature  is  destitute  of  holiness." 
This  is  a  compact,  lucid  statement  of  the  theme,  and, 
so  far  as  mere  statement  is  concerned,  this  is  the  whole 
of  it.  But  this  was  too  calm  for  the  preacher's  mood. 
Flushed  with  the  excitement  of  reflection  on  the  sub- 
ject, he  was  not  content  with  clearness :  he  must  gain 
intensity  as  well.  Light  was  not  enough :  he  must 
have  a  calcium  light.  He  therefore  ejected  his  theme 
in  words  like  these :  "  Man,  until  regenerated  by  the 
Spirit  of  Almighty  God,  is  absolutely  sinful;  wholly 
an  enemy  to  God;  in  all  the  faculties  of  his  being, 
distorted,  depraved,  guilty,  and  corrupt;  so  that  no 
remnant  of  spiritual  life  remains  in  him,  but  he  is  dead 
in  trespasses  and  sins,  and  an  object  of  God's  utter 
abhorrence." 

Abstract  attention,  for  a  moment,  from  the  theology 
of  this  invective :  look  only  at  its  rhetoric.  The 
preacher  knew  what  he  was  at ;  he  had  very  definite 
notions,  as  the  result  proved,  of  what  the  sermon  was 
to  be.  He  meant  to  give  the  hottest  of  hot  blasts  of 
hyper-Calvinistic  theology.  The  misfortune  was  that 
his  proposition  waji  not  fire-proof.    It  caught  a  flarae 


ECT.  XXV.]  THE  PROPOSITION :   BREVITY  355 

from  his  tl  3ology,  and  in  a  moment  was  ablaze.  That 
is  to  say,  the  preacher  put  into  the  proposition  the 
impressions  which  it  was  the  business  of  the  discussion 
to  create.  The  result  was  prolix  repetition,  and,  what 
is  so  often  a  further  result  of  such  a  rhetorical  error, 
gross  exaggeration.  Impression  out  of  place  very 
easily  flares  up  into  an  extreme.  Again  and  again  it 
deserves  to  be  repeated  that  a  proposition  is  a  state- 
ment, and  only  that.  To  vary  it,  and  repeat  it,  and 
reiterate  it,  and  intensify  it,  and  magnify  it,  and  dignify 
it,  for  the  sake  of  rhetorical  effect,  are  all  foreign  to 
its  purpose.  A  perfect  proposition  never  needs  such 
handling.  To  inflict  it  on  a  good  proposition  is  only 
hammering  at  the  nail  when  it  is  already  driven  to  the 
head. 

This  view  leads  to  the  further  remark,  that  it  is  not 
good  policy  to  lift  a  proposition,  in  point  of  impressive- 
ness  of  structure,  to  a  level  with  the  conclusion.  A 
proposition  must  always  contain  the  conclusion ;  must 
often,  in  substance,  be  the  conclusion ;  but  it  should 
invariably  fall  below  the  conclusion  in  impressiveness 
of  statement.  No  single  principle  of  homiletic  policy 
is  more  variously  applicable  than  this,  "Leave  room 
for  increase  of  impression."  Begin  low,  and  work  up. 
Leave  space  for  rise  of  interest.  Begin  with  a  clear 
but  calm  statement  of  the  truth ;  then  set  that  truth 
to  revolving;  prove  that  truth;  illustrate  that  truth; 
vary  the  position  of  that  truth ;  disclose  in  light  and 
shadow  the  proportions  of  that  truth ;  till,  as  the  dis- 
cussion advances,  the  hearer  feels  that  truth,  and  only 
that.  Then  in  the  conclusion  you  may  assume  that 
he  feels  it,  and  may  proceed  to  apply  it  in  the  assur* 
ance  that  no  language  wl  ich  it  prompts  you  to  employ 
will  be  an  exaggeration,  or  will  seem  to  be  such  to  the 


t.    .  .• 


i 


356  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.         [lect.  xx^ 

hearer's  quickened  conscience  and  deepened  sensi- 
bilities. But  to  anticipate  all  this  in  the  structure 
of  the  proposition  is  sheer  reversal  of  nature.  It  can 
not  succeed  in  its  aim,  and  it  would  be  an  injury  to 
^  the  discourse  if  it  should  succeed. 

^  I       Further :  the  proposition  is  often  rendered  needlessly 
diffuse  by  making  it  consist  of  the  divisions  of  the 
sermon.      That  which   has   been    termed    the    plural 
proposition  is  not  relatively  desirable.     Unity  may  ex- 
ist in  such  a  proposition  :  necessity  may  rarely  require 
it.     But,  when  no  necessity  for  it  exists,  its  prolixity 
should  exclude  it.     Test  this  in  your  own  experience, 
when  you  incline  to  adopt  Dr.  Emmons's  method  of 
stating  the  theme  by  enumerating  the  divisions :  pause, 
and  ask  yourself,  "Why?"     You  will  often  find  that 
I    you  do  it  only  for  your  own  convenience  in  the  discus- 
1    sion.     It  is  always  attended  with  this  incidental  evil, 
/     that  it  discloses  the  plot  of  a  discourse  at  the  outset. 
It  leaves  nothing  to  stimulate  expectation  by  suspense 
of  curiosity.     This  is  often  a  sufficient  objection  to  a 
J         prolix  proposition, — that  it  discloses  too  much.     In- 
\       stead  of  furnishing  only  a  center  of  interest,  it  marks 
out  all  the  radii  of  the  circle.      To  justify  this  the 
necessities  of  the  subject  should  be  imperative.     When 
\  the  gist  of  the  subject  can  be  made  palpable  without 
it,  the  plural  form  is  an  encumbrance.     Only  the  gist  oi 
the  subject  is  needed  in  a  proposition. 

The  defects  in  point  of  prolixity  which  have  now 
been  named  are  illustrated  in  some  sermons  by  dis- 
tinguished preachers.  Let  me  instance  two  examples 
which  will  at  least  show  that  it  is  scarcely  possible  to 
caricature  the  extreme  of  these  defects  beyond  the 
reality  of  them  in  the  literature  of  the  palpit.  From 
the  text,  "  Let  him  that  thinketh  he  standeth  take  heed 


LEcr.  XXV.]         THE  PROPOSITION :   BREVITY.  357 

lest  he  fall,"  Bishop  Lowth  proposes  thus :  "  That 
these  words  may  not  only  enter  into  your  ears,  but  sink 
clown  into  your  hearts,  I  shall  first  consider  the  insta- 
bility of  human  affairs  and  the  change  of  things ;  that 
both  particular  men  and  particular  churches  may  fall 
from  their  steadfastness ;  and  that,  even  while  they  think 
they  stand,  they  may  be  in  the  greatest  danger  of  fall- 
ing :  and,  secondly,  I  shall  endeavor  to  find  out  the  way 
in  which  we  may  secure  ourselves  against  such  misfor- 
tune :  that,  whatever  come,  we  may  not  fall,  but  stand 
against  all  assaults,  and  so  persevere,  till  our  work  is 
done,  to  the  end  of  the  day,  when  we  depart  hence,  in 
the  Lord,  to  receive  our  reward  or  doom." 

Two  examples  were  promised.  A  young  painter 
once  requested  permission  to  exhibit  to  his  master  two 
specimens  of  his  handiwork  for  criticism.  Only  one 
was  sent  at  the  first  to  the  master's  studio.  It  was 
examined,  and  returned  with  this  opinion :  "  I  prefer 
the  other."  Wait  till  you  hear  "the  other"  before 
you  hazard  so  adventurous  a  criticism.  Dr.  Donne, 
from  the  text,  "  Father,  forgive  them,  for  they  know 
not  what  they  do,"  proceeds  in  this  style:  "These 
words  will  be  fittest  considered  like  a  goodly  palace, 
if  we  rest  a  little  in  an  outer  court  upon  a  considera- 
tion of  prayer  in  the  general ;  and  then  draw  the  view 
of  a  palace  in  a  second  court,  considering  this  precious 
prayer  in  particular  as  the  face  of  the  whole  palace; 
and  then  we  will  pass  through  the  chiefest  lOoms  of 
the  palace  itself,  and  then  insist  on  four  steps  being 
taken."     This  leads  him  to  specify  four  subdivisions. 

What  conceivable  object  of  a  proposition  can  be 
gained  by  such  harangues  as  these  ?  They  are  scarcely 
intelligible  ;  they  certainly  are  uninteresting,  except  as 
caricatures     no  man  can  remember  them;   and  their 


358  THB  THEOR"?  OF  PREACHING.         [lbct.  xxv 

bulk  is  frightful.     There  is  scarcely  a  quality  of  a  good 
proposition  which  they  do  not  sacrifice.     The  propo- 
^ion  of  a  French  preacher  resembled  these  in  magni- 
/  tude  of  theme,  but  was  infinitely  superior  in  brevity 
/   and  in  sprightliness.      Said  he,  "  I  shall  discourse  to- 
I     ;    day,  first,  upon  things  which  I  know  and  you  don't; 
^       secondly,  upon  things  which  you  know  and  I  don't; 
^         thirdly,  upon  things  which  neither  of  us  knows." 
^  (3)  A  third  principle  affecting  the  form  of  propo 

\     sitions.  is  that  a  proposition  should  be  as  specific  as  it 
V     can  be  consistently  with  brevity.     Specific  statement  is 
desirable   specially  for  three  reasons.      It  limits  the 
range  of  a  discussion ;   it  concentrates  attention ;  it 
stimulates  interest. 
-    ^  )   Observe,  therefore,  in  the  first  place,  that,  to  promote 
the  specific  quality,  the  logical  form  of  propositions 
should  generally  be  preferred  to  the  rhetorical  form. 
Which  is  the  more  specific  of  the  two  following  themes  ? 
First,  "The   divine  government;"   second,  "The  di- 
vine government  is  founded  upon  mingled  justice  and 
benevolence."      Which    is    the    more    stimulating   to 
attention?    Again:  on  the  same  principle,  the  plural 
form  of  propositions  must  sometimes  be  preferred  to 
the  single  form.      Clearness  occasionally  demands  a 
proposition  in  which  the  whole  discussion  is  mapped. 
I  The  divisions  need  to  be  specified  like  harbors  on  a 
f\  chart.      "I  propose  to  consider,   first  this,   secondly 
/^     that,  thirdly  the  other,"  is  a  form  of  proposition  which 
\  may  assist  undisciplined  hearers  to  follow  an  intricate 
\  discussion  of  an  abstract  theme.     Any  one  of  these 
contingencies  —  the  mental  character  of  the  hearers,  or 
the  abstractness  of  the  subject,  or  the  involution  of  its 
treatment  —  may  justify  such  a  proposition;   and  all 
combined  may  demand  it. 


-/.   , .  3C^ 


LMCT.  XXV.]      THE  PROPOSITION :   SPECIFICNESS.  859 

Further ;  to  promote  the  specific  quality,  a  proposi* 
tion  should  always  convey  a  complete  idea  in  itself. 
" Let  us  consider  this  subject."  What  subject?  "  The 
reasons  which  enforce  this  duty  upon  all  men."  What 
duty ?  "I  propose  to  show  that  this  practice  is  con- 
demned by  reason,  conscience,  and  the  word  of  God." 
What  practice  ?  These  forms  of  proposition,  you  per- 
ceive, are  incomplete.  An  exposition  of  a  text  does  not 
necessarily  define  a  theme  sufficiently  as  derived  from 
the  text.  We  may  naturally  call  attention  thus  to  the 
text  itself,  when  the  text  is  the  subject.  We  may  de- 
fine a  subject  only  in  the  general  by  designating  it  as 
"The  subject  presented  in  the  text."  But  these  are 
very  different  forms  from  that  in  which  we  ask  atten- 
tion to  "this  subject,"  "this  duty,"  "this  principle," 
and  leave  the  hearer  to  his  wits  in  discovering  the 
theme  of  discussion.  This  will  be  best  illustrated  by 
an  example  in  full.  Take  the  following  from  the  Rev. 
Dr.  Romeyn,  omitting  the  text,  that  you  may  see  what 
a  headless  trunk  a  proposition  may  be  to  one  who  had 
not  given  attention  to  the  text.  Dr.  Romeyn  proposes 
thus :  "  To  the  means  by  which  the  latter  were  preserved 
from  the  desolation  of  the  former,  the  manner  in  which 
this  means  was  used,  and  the  success  which  accompanied 
the  manner  of  using  the  means,  our  attention  is  directed 
in  the  text.  A  few  remarks  explanatory  of  each  of 
these  particulars  will  first  be  offered,  after  which  such 
a  use  will  be  made  of  the  text  as  is  suitable  to  the 
solemnity  of  the  present  occasion."  What  one  specific 
idea  do  you  derive  from  such  a  proposition?  How 
much  do  you  know  of  the  object  of  the  sermon? 

Again :  the  specific  quality  requires  that  the  propo- 
sition should  not  generally  be  stated  in  the  exact  lan- 
guage of  the  text.    From  the  text,  "It  pleased  the 


360  THE  ^THEORr  OF  PREACHil^G.         ti^CT.  xxv 

Father  that  in  him  should  all  fullness  dwell,"  Simeon 
derives  the  subject,  "  The  Fullness  of  Christ."  From 
the  text,  "Christ  is  all,  and  in  all,"  he  deduces  the 
theme,  "  Christ  is  All."  From  the  text,  "  Wrath  is  come 
upon  them  to  the  uttermost,"  President  Edwards  draws 
the  proposition,  "  Wrath  is  come  upon  the  wicked  to 
the  uttermost."  What  is  the  cause  of  the  dullness  oi 
these  forms  of  proposition  ?  They  are  not  obscure ; 
they  are  not  prolix :  why  are  they  so  devoid  of  stimulus  ? 
It  is  because  they  specify  nothing  in  advance  of  the 
letter  of  the  texts.  Scarcely  do  they  vary  the  language 
of  the  texts.  They  do  nothing  to  reproduce  the  ideas 
of  the  texts  in  modern  and  vivacious  style.  As  propo- 
sitions, therefore,  they  add  nothing  to  the  texts.  As 
well  might  the  texts  stand  alone.  Contrast  such  propo- 
sitions with  this  from  Dr.  Emmons.  Text :  "  The  bed 
is  shorter  than  that  a  man  can  stretch  himself  on  it 
and  the  covering  narrower  than  that  he  can  wrap  him- 
self in  it."  Proposition :  "  A  man's  religion  may  be  his 
ruin."  This  is  clear,  pithy,  and  alluring  to  attention, 
because  it  specifies  in  modern  dialect  the  literal  sense 
of  the  text.  For  the  uses  of  a  proposition  it  improves 
upon  the  text. 
/  The  specific  quality  in  a  proposition  demands,  fur- 
ther, that  it  should  not  specify  any  thing  which  is  not 
discussed  in  the  sermon.  The  proposition  sometimes 
overreaches  the  sermon,  not  by  needless  or  irrelevant 
synonyms,  but  through  inadvertence.  "  The  folly  and 
guilt  of  being  ashamed  of  Christ "  is  the  theme  of  a 
sermon  which  discusses  only  the  guilt  of  that  sin.  "  The 
folly  "  of  it  is  an  excrescence.  This  example  represents 
a  class  of  cases  in  which  the  defect  is  not  primarily  in 
the  substance,  but  in  the  form  of  the  j  reposition.  The 
cause  of  the  defect  is  an  unmeaning  overflow  of  the 
style. 


utcT.  XXV.]        THE  PROPOSITION :   ELEGANCE.  301 


of  the     y/ 

s  great  J^f 


(4)  A  fourth  principle  respecting  the   form 
proposition  is  that  it  should  be  framed  with  as 
degree  of  elegance  as  is  consistent  with  clear  and  for-  t^i 
cible   expression.     Finish   of    form   often   reduplicates 
force.  (  Sculpture  owes  much  to  the  purity  and  polish 
of  marble.     Similar  qualities  produce  similar  effects  in 
style.     The  style  of  a  proposition  should  comprise  that 
rare  blending  and  proportion  of  qualities  which  never 
make  one  think  of  the  style.     To  this  perfection  of 
form,   elegance   is   essential.     Two   things   are   funda- 
mental to  it. 

Elegance  requires  the  restriction  of  the  vocabulary 
of  propositions  to  classic  English  words.  "The  un- 
belief of  gospel-sinners  "  is  the  subject  of  a  sermon  by 
the  late  Professor  Shepherd.  Imagine  the  sermon 
addressed  to  Lord  Macaulay,  or  to  Edward  Everett. 
"Soul-prosperity,"  "soul-dejection,"  —  these  are  themes 
of  sermons  by  Vrhitefield.  What  right  have  preachers, 
more  than  other  scholars,  to  create  a  mongrel  dialect  ? 
"  Warning  to  carnal  and  worldly-minded  professors  "  is 
the  proposition  of  a  discourse  by  Simeon.  Professors 
of  what  ?  A  few  years  ago,  a  sign  over  a  shop  in  the 
Strand  in  London  announced  that  a  "professor  of 
shirt-making "  offered  his  services  there.  A  sermon 
was  once  read  in  this  lecture-room,  for  criticism,  the 
preacher  standing  at  the  right  hand  of  the  presiding 
officer  ;  and  the  proposition  was  "  To  consider  the  sins 
of  professors."  The  usage  of  the  pulpit  has  from  time 
immemorial  been  unscholarly  in  retaining  obsolete 
words,  cant  words,  technical  words,  words  never  heard 
outside  of  the  pulpit,  which  deform  a  proposition  even 
more  than  any  other  fragment  of  a  discourse,  because 
its  pre-eminence  of  position  enforces  attention  to  them. 

Again :  elegance  in  a  proposition  requires  purity  and 


362  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.         [lect.  xxv 

ease  of  English  ^  onstruction.  "  The  guilt  of  unbelief 
under  gospel  lig.\  f  and  the  strivings  of  the  Spirit,  con- 
science can  not  but  discern  and  condemn."  Why  is 
not  this  an  elegant  proposition?  Because  its  construc- 
tion is  Latinized.  It  is  Ciceronian,  not  English,  except 
in  the  hybrid  style  of  English  for  which  critics  have 
coined  the  epithet  "  Johnsonese."  That  is  not  a  per- 
fect proposition  which  attracts  attention  by  its  clumsi- 
ness. It  may  be  clear ;  it  may  be  forcible :  but  why 
not  adorn  and  even  augment  these  qualities  by  adding 
J  elegance  as  well? 
,  J&  * '^  (5)  The  fifth  rule  respecting  the  form  of  a  proposi^ 
i|/  \.tion  IS  that  its  preface  should  be  distinct,  simple,  and 
*lj^^'  bn  different  occasions,  varied.  I  refer  here  to  the  few 
prefatory  words  by  which  the  announcement  of  a  sub- 
ject is  foretold.  These  are  often  of  more  importance 
than  they  seem  to  be.  First,  the  preface  should  be  dis- 
tinct. Let  it  indicate  clearly,  for  the  moment,  that  the 
subject  is  about  to  be  defined.  Give  always  a  mo- 
mentary forewarning,  which  shall  be  to  the  announce- 
ment of  the  subject  what  the  bell  of  the  telephone  is  to 
the  message  which  is  to  follow  it.  Again  :  the  preface 
should  be  simple.  It  is  only  a  rhetorical  expedient  to 
call  attention ;  do  not  make  a  parade  of  it.  The  most 
obvious  thing  to  say  is  the  best  thing  to  be  said. 

The  preface  should  be  varied  on  different  occasions. 
Five  things  suggest  the  most  natural  variations.  One 
is  the  preacher ;  as  when  you  say  in  announcing  your 
subject,  '^ I  invite  your  attention ;  "  "I  propose  to  speak 
of ;  "  "I  design  to  prove ;  "  "I  intend  to  illustrate ; " 
"  It  is  my  wish  to  consider ; "  "  It  is  my  purpose  to 
remark  upon,"  etc.  But  this  form,  always  adopted,  is 
egotistical.  A  second  suggestion  of  variety  is  the  text ; 
as  when  you  inti^oduce  your  theme  by  observing,  "  The 


> 


LEOT.  XXV.]       THE  PROPOSITION :   ITS  PREFACE.  363 

text  contains;"  "The  text  invites;"  "The  text  sug- 
gests ; "  "  The  text  illustrates ; "  "  The  text  is  an  ex- 
ample of,"  etc.  But  this  form,  always  chosen,  is  monot- 
onous. A  third  suggestion  of  variety  is  the  sermon ; 
as  when  you  indicate  your  proposition  by  saying,  "  Tliis 
discourse  will  be  devoted ; "  "  The  remarks  this  morn- 
ing ; "  "  The  discussion  before  us ;  "  "  The  subject  of  our 
meditations ; "  "  The  theme  of  our  reflections,"  etc. 
But  this  form,  unvaried,  is  an  excess  of  form.  Some- 
times the  occasion  may  suggest  the  preface  ;  as  when  you 
open  the  way  by  saying,  "  The  occasion  is  favorable ; " 
"  The  day  is  becoming ;  "  "  The  services  of  the  hour ;  " 
"  The  improvement  of  holy  time,"  etc.  But  this,  with- 
out variety,  is  stiff.  The  fifth  thing  which  may  pave 
the  way  to  the  subject  is  the  audience ;  as  when  you 
say,  "  My  friends  and  brethren ;  "  "  The  experience  of 
many  of  you ;  "  "  The  inquiries  of  some  of  you ;  "  "  The 
difficulties  which  you  have  felt ;  "  "  The  interest  which 
some  have  expressed ;  "  "  The  afflictions  which  some  of 
you  have  suffered."  The  personal  history  of  the  audi- 
ence may  thus  be  made  to  suggest  many  subjects  of  dis- 
course. This  is  not  a  hackneyed  form  of  preface.  It 
gives  a  gentle  stimulus  to  attention.  Always  use  your 
audiences  in  every  natural  way.  As  yoii  prove,  illus- 
trate, explain,  by  reference  to  them,  so  build  your  sub- 
jects upon  their  thoughts,  if  you  can.  Seem  to  have 
selected  the  theme  at  their  suggestion.  It  is  an  iimo- 
cent  art. 

But  the  point  I  would  emphasize  is  to  aim  at  variety. 
You  perceive  that  the  possible  forms  of  these  rhetorical 
prefaces  are  innumerable.  There  is  no  need  of  monoto- 
ny. A  preacher,  even  in  trifles,  should  not  be  a  parrot. 
Charles  Lamb  used  to  exercise  great  ingenuity  in  his 
modes  of  subscribing  his  name  to  his  letters.     Genius 


364  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.         [lbct.  xxv 

is  not  abo^  e  care  for  such  trivialities.  But  in  preaching, 
nothing  that  saves  a  momentary  sense  of  monotony  is  a 
triviality.  Any  thing  that  must  be  done  is  worth  doing 
vivaciously.  We  should  imitate  Nature,  which  never 
makes  two  anemones  alike.  Even  snowflakes,  which 
are  to  melt  in  the  falling,  the  microscope  shows  to  be 
copies  of  an  interminable  variety  of  geometric  figures, 
some  of  which  science  has  never  conceived  till  our 
times.  If  we  were  to  select  the  one  most  significant 
and  omnipresent  sign  of  life  in  matter,  mind,  or  spirit, 
it  would  be  this  one  grace  of  all  discourse,  —  variety. 


f 


/ 

LECTURE  XXVI.  (  f  /   f-M^ 


THE    DIVISION:    NECESSITY,    EXPRESSION. 

The  word  "  division  "  defines  itself.  We  designate 
by  it  the  principal  sections  of  an  orderly  discussion. 

I.  Are  divisions  necessary  in  a  sermon  ?  The  ques- 
tion is  twofold:  Is  the  existence  of  divisions  neces- 
sary to  the  speaker?  Is  the  statement  of  divisions 
necessary  to  the  hearer? 

1st,  The  objections  to  either  the  existence  or  the 
statement  of  divisions  are  briefly  these :  1.  That 
preaching  by  pre-arranged  plan  tends  to  the  exclusion 
of  extemporaneous  thought;  2.  That  it  tends  to  ex- 
cessive formality  in  preaching ;  3.  That  it  impairs  the 
freedom  of  direct  appeals;  4.  That  it  is  unfavorable 
to  unity  of  discourse ;  5.  That  in  argumentative  ser- 
mons it  gives  needless  prominence  to  weak  arguments. 

2d,  Yet  these  objections  will  disappear  as  we  proceed 
to  consider  the  reasons  for  both  having  and  stating  divis- 
ions in  the  discourses  of  the  pulpit.  We  suspend,  for 
the  present,  all  questions  respecting  the  number  of  di- 
visions, and  the  numerical  form  of  statement.  All  that 
is  claimed  at  present  is  that  good  discourse  in  the 
pulpit  demands  that  a  preacher  shall  have  divisions  in 
his  own  mind,  and  that  he  shall  so  state  them  that 
hearers  shall  be  distinctly  sensible  of  them. 

(1)  Divisions  thus  formed  and  stated  promote  per 

365-— r:::::::^ 


r, 


366  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [lbot.  Ixyl 

^^jpicuity  of  discussioD.     They  aid  a  preacher  in  gaining 

^ ^perspicuity ;    clear  mental   action   works  instinctively 

by  plaD,  and  each  assists  the  other.  You  understand 
a  subject  the  better  for  having  reduced  it  to  a  plan  of 
discourse.  A  natural  division  of  a  subject  for  use  is  no 
more  nor  less  than  a  philosophical  analysis  and  arrange- 
ment of  its  materials ;  your  own  thoughts  are  the  more 
lucid  for  the  discipline.  Divisions  also  assist  the  hearer 
to  clearness  in  understanding  a  discussion.  Why  should 
not  a  hearer,  in  this  respect,  profit  by  a  statement  of 
p,  plan,  as  well  as  a  preacher  by  the  existence  of  a  plan  ? 
;  ^The  fact  that  he  is  a  hearer,  that  he  must  depend  on 
the  momentary  perceptions  of  the  ear,  that  he  has  no 
i-  chance  for  review,  for  delay,  for  growth  of  thought,  ren- 
\  ders  him  specially  dependent  upon  the  facilities  which 
logic  suggests  for  an  understanding  of  oral  discourse. 
The  whole  argument  for  the  statement  of  propositions 
bears  with  nearly  equal  force  upon  the  necessity  of  stat- 
ing divisions  also. 

Specially  is  it  to  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  subjects 
of  the  pulpit  are  such  as  to  render  divisions  necessary 
to  clearness  in  their  oral  discussion.  The  range  of 
thought  with  which  the  pulpit  has  to  deal  is  immensely 
above  that  to  which  the  popular  mind  is  stimulated  by 
any  other  form  of  public  speech.  A  preacher  has  a 
very  critical  work  to  do  in  attempting  to  bring  down 
themes  of  high  discourse  within  reach  of  the  common 
mind,  and  to  secure  for  them  an  intelligent  and  inter- 
ested hearing.  Science  tells  us  that  a  drop  of  water 
contains  a  flash  of  lightning.  Thus  electric  aie  the 
elements  of  the  common  stock  of  thought  in  pulpit 
discourse.  Common  are  they  as  the  raindrops ;  yet  the 
forces  of  vivid  conception  and  of  intense  impression 
are  locked  up  in  them,    A  preacher's  work  is  to  release 


LEOT   xivi.]  THE  DIVISION :    NECESSITY.  867 

and  to  develop  those  forces.  To  do  this,  we  need 
every  facility  of  expression  which  logic  gives  to  vivid- 
ness. 

Hence  has  arisen  the  peculiar  favor  with  which  these 
forms  of  analytic  discourse  have  been  regarded  in  the 
pulpit.  So  far  from  their  being  a  deformity,  originating 
in  the  pedantry  of  the  pulpit,  they  are  one  of  the  ne- 
cessities to  which  the  pulpit  has  been  driven  by  the  lofty 
nature  of  its  subjects.  How  large  a  proportion  of  the 
common  people,  taken  at  random,  could  Ralph  Waldo 
Emerson  hold  together  by  his  cementless  periods  on 
Immortality  ?  Yet  the  pulpit  sets  itself  to  the  task  of 
making  immortality  a  living  truth  to  men  whose  days 
are  spent  in  shoe-shops  and  hay-fields,  and  to  women 
who  live  over  wash-tubs  and  cooking-stoves.  The  thing 
can  not  be  done  by  the  fluent  and  unscholarly  method 
of  the  lyceum. 

(2)  Divisions  promote  comprehensiveness  of  discus- 
sion. They  assist  a  preacher  in"  '^^HScting  and  arran- 
ging the  materials  for  such  a  discussion.  Try  the  ex- 
periment on  the  materials  of  a  half-digested  sermon. 
Reduce  such  thoughts  as  you  have  to  a  plan.  The 
effect  will  be  to  reveal  to  you  at  once  what  deficiency 
exists,  and  where  it  is.  That  is  to  say  a  deficiency,  if  it 
exists,  is  disclosed  by  classification.  Is  an  argument 
missing  ?  Is  an  objection  unanswered  ?  Is  a  fact  want- 
ing for  illustration?  Is  one  side  of  the  subject  a  blank? 
Is  an  application  of  it  impracticable,  or  far-fetched? 
Whatever  be  the  gap  in  the  fabric,  classifying  in  a  plan, 
in  which  statement  shall  be  definite,  and  arrangeujent 
orderly,  will  discover  the  gap,  and  wiQ  set  you  at  work 
to  fill  it.  In  this  respect,  the  materials  of  a  discourse 
are  like  the  specimens  of  a  cabinet  of  minerals.  Noth- 
ing but  a  reduction  of  them  to  order  by  classification 


^/Vi^v 


^ 


868  .  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [lect.  xxvi 

will  disclose  what  vacancies  exist,  and  must  be  filled 
\    Important  omissions  in  a  sermon  are  thus  avoided.     ' 
Divisions  also  assist  a  hearer  ir  perceiving  and  ap- 
preciating  the   comprehensiveness   of   discussion.     St. 
Peter's  at  Rome  makes  no  such  impression  of  magni- 
tude from  an  outside  view  as  from  the  interior.     So  it 
is  with  a  complete  discussion.     To  be   appreciated,  it 
must  be  explored :  the  parts  of  it,  in  their  order,  must 
be  seen.     Materials  classified  in  a  visible  plan  will  make 
the  impression  of  immensity,  when  the  same  materials 
!  thrown  together  miscellaneously  will  seem  diminutive, 
I  because  incoherent,  and,  if  arranged  in  invisible  order, 
\  will  be  monotonous. 

The  entire  force  of  textual  preaching  depends  on 
this  power  of  divisions  to  reveal  a  subject.  The  full- 
ness of  thought  in  a  commonplace  text  may  often 
be  disclosed  to  the  dullest  hearer  by  the  expedient  of 
textual  divisions.  A  modern  preacher,  on  the  text, 
"  Men  ought  always  to  pray,  and  not  to  faint,"  divides 
his  discussion  thus:  1.  The  text  commands  a  duty, 
which  a  modern  philosopher  has  pronounced  the  "  most 
stupendous"  act  of  which  man  is  capable,  —  "To 
fray ;''  2.  The  text  enforces  the  duty  of  prayer  by 
appeal  to  the  supreme  faculty  of  our  nature,  —  "  Men 
ought  to  pray ;  "  3.  The  text  suggests  that,  so  far  as  we 
.  know,  no  other  order  of  being  exists,  to  which  prajei 
is  a  d-ity  so  imperative  as  to  man ;  4.  The  text  implies 
that  success  in  prayer  depends  on  that  state  of  mind 
which  insures  its  constancy,  —  "Men  ought  always  to 
\  pray ;  "  5.  The  text  teaches  that  prayer  is  an  act  of 
courage  in  times  of  extreme  emergency :  "  Men  ou^ht 
always  to  pray,  and  not  to  faints  Does  not  this  plan 
illustrate  how  hackneyed  texts  may  be  freshened,  and 
how  biblical   authority  may  be  given  to  a  suggestive 


LEOT.  XXVI.]  THE  DIVISION :   NECESSITY.  369 

train  of  thought,  by  the  mere  sense  of  fullness  in  the 
discussion,  produced  by  a  textual  division  elaborated 
and  formally  stated  ?  "^       \ 

(3)  Divisions  promqte_unity_pf  discussion.  ThAy  J!)  / 
assist  a  preacher  in  presefving~unity.  That  preacher 
must  habitually  think  in  slipshod  gait  who  can  delib* 
erately  plan  a  vagrant  discourse.  The  very  effort  to 
classify  materials  tends  to  unify  them  in  the  result. 
It  is  an  excellence  in  divisions,  that  they  thus  stand 
guard  over  extemporaneous  thinking,  and  shut  out  all 
that  is  not  tributary  to  the  result.  Still  more  do  well- 
constructed  divisions  assist  hearers  in  perceiving  the 
unity  of  a  sermon.  Why  is  it  that  the  incidents  often 
seem  to  make  more  impression  than  the  doctrine  of  a 
sermon?  A  standing  grief  is  this  to  preachers.  An 
Ulustration,  an  anecdote,  a  pictorial  passage,  an  anti- 
thetic sentence  will  be  remembered  and  commented 
upon,  when  the  drift  of  thought  to  which  they  were 
tributary  will  not  seem  to  have  been  understood.  The 
reason  often  is  that  the  drift  of  thought  has  not  been 
made  palpable  by  landmarks.  If  you  have  ever  read 
Carlyle's  "  History  of  the  French  Revolution,"  you 
were  doubtless  sensible  of  the  fact  that  it  is  unfit  for  a 
beginner  in  the  study  of  French  history.  Familiarity 
with  other  histories  of  the  same  period  is  necessary  to 
an  understanding  of  Carlyle.  Unity  of  aim  exists  in 
his  work.  Trained  readers  can  perceive  that  unity. 
But  to  other  readers  it  is  a  chaos  of  inconsequent 
remark,  from  which  they  get  nothing  but  here  and 
there  a  thought,  a  metaphor,  an  invective,  which  stands 
alone  in  a  wilderness  of  incoherences.  History  to  such 
readers  the  work  is  not.  Very  similar  are  those  ser- 
mons which  require  trained  thinkers  to  perceive  the 
drift  of  them  underlying  their  incidents. 


370  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.        [lect.  xxvi 

(4)  Divisions,  further,  promote  progress  in  a  discus- 
sion. They  assist  a  preacher  in  maEng  progress.  Or- 
ganization achieves  in  discourse  that  which  it  achieves 
in  every  thing  else,  —  rapidity  of  execution.  Sir  Walter 
Scott  lamented  late  in  life  that  he  had  never  habitu- 
ated himself  to  compose  his  imaginative  fiction  by  pre- 
viously formed  outline  of  materials.  He  advised  young 
writers  not  to  imitate  his  carelessness  in  that  respect. 
He  pronounced  it  intellectual  recklessness  to  trust,  as 
he  did,  to  the  excitement  of  composition  for  the  evolu- 
tion of  his  plots.  That  he  could  do  it  he  attributed  to 
the  imaginative  character  of  his  work. 

The  same  expedient  assists  a  hearer,  also,  in  per- 
ceiving progress  of  discussion.  Few  things  are  so  es- 
sential to  impressive  discourse  as  the  sense  of  progress. 
Hearers  crave  the  consciousness  of  achievement.  Have 
you  never  listened  to  sermons  in  which  this  sense  of 
achievement  was  so  feeble,  that  hearing  was  labor? 
Very  earnest  and  animated  preachers  may  produce  this 
effect.  I  They  remind  you  of  a  top  at  the  height  of  its 
iiivisibre  revolutions,  so  tremendously  busy  are  they 
^^^'^^'•^ spinning  on  their  own  axis ;  but  you  do  not  seem  to  get 
'/  on  with  them.y  Why  do  hills,  valleys,  rivers,  ravines, 
mile-stones,  guide-boards  make  a  traveler  sensible  of 
progress?  Any  thing  which  diversifies  the  monotony 
of  scenery  creates  the  sense  of  advance.  St.  Paul, 
when  he  came  to  "  The  Three  Taverns,"  "  thanked  God, 
and  took  courage." 

Our  modern  usage  in  oratory,  by  which  we  say  **hi 
the  first  place,"  "  in  the  second  place,"  and  so  on,  had 
its  origin  in  the  old  Roman  custom  which  the  speakers 
in  the  Forum  had,  of  associating  mentally  the  heads 
of  a  speech  with  certain  localities  around  them.  This 
thought  was  deposited  in  one  place,  that  thought  in 


H 


LBOT.  XXVI.]  THE  DIVISION :    NECESSITY.  371 

another  place ;  and,  as  the  speech  advanced,  the  orator 
moved  around  mentally  from  one  locality  to  another, 
gathering  his  materials  as  he  went,  and  labeling  them 
for  the  aid  of  the  hearer's  sense  of  progress,  as  well  as 
his  own,  with  the  formulae  of  introduction,  "  in  the  first 
place,"  etc.  In  the  first  rank  of  forensic  appeals  the 
transitions  are  marked  with  even  more  than  the  clerical 
precision  of  "first,"  "secondly,"  "thirdly."  "I  have 
now  finished  this  part  of  my  argument ;  "  "I  beg  you  to 
remember  the  fact  which  I  have  proved;"  "And  now 
let  me  ask  your  attention  to  another  point,"  —  such  is 
the  style  of  transition  which  you  hear  in  court-rooms, 
where  pleaders  have  a  point  to  carry,  with  twelve  plain 
men  in  a  jury-box.  The  smooth  ground-swell  of  dis- 
course so  often  chosen  in  the  pulpit  by  men  who  affect 
a  literary  style  would  find  no  favor  among  the  leaders 
of  the  English  or  American  bar. 

(5)  Divisions  also  promote  conciseness  of  discus- 
sion. They  aid  a  preacher  in  being  concise.  Skillful 
architects  will  tell  you  to  the  inch  the  shape  and  pro- 
portions of  the  building  which  shall  most  successfully 
economize  space.  So,  in,  a  sermon,  good  divisions  help 
to  compact  structure.  A  perfect  sermonizer  will  trust 
largely  to  them  for  crowding  the  greatest  ^ulk  of 
thought  into  the  shortest  time. 

Divisions  also  assist  a  hearer  in  appreciating  a  com- 
pact discussion.  To  make  an  undisciplined  hearer 
sensible  of  the  fact  of  crowded  thought  in  a  sermon, 
you  must  in  some  way  tell  him  of  it.  Divisions  do 
this  indirectly.  They  call  attention  to  one  thing  at  a 
time :  therefore  they  concentrate  attention.  They  dis- 
close, if  it  exists,  all  waste  of  words.  Consequently 
preachers  who  spin  discourses  of  thin  fabric  are  not 
fond  of  definite  divisions.     Nothing  discovers  poverty 


V 


372  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       [user,  xxvi 

of  thought  more  surely  than  a  pertinent  plan.  A  good 
division  would  cause  many  an  inflated  sermon  to  col- 
lapse. "  Oh  for  a  thought ! "  said  one  laj^man,  after 
Vj  listening  to  a  fluent  preacher,  — "  Oh  for  a  thought !  I 
get  nothing  to  carry  away  with  me."  Probably  the  ser- 
mon contained  no  thought  wliich  would  admit  of  crisp 
statement ;  nothing  which  would  bear  to  be  numbered 
"  one,  two,  three : "  therefore  nothing  worth  carrying 
away.  So  far  from  being  an  evil,  it  is  an  excellence  in 
divisions,  that  they  restrain  excessive  hortation.  For 
some  men  it  is  a  healthful  restraint  upon  tiresome  ap- 
peals, that  it  is  unnatural  to  say,  "  In  the  fourth  place 
I  warn  you,  and  in  the  fifth  place  I  exhort  you,  and  in 
the  sixth  place  I  beg  you  to  weep." 

(6)  Divisions  promote  elegance  of  discussion.  But 
are  not  divisions  formal,  hard,  angular?  I  answer.  Is 
there  no  beauty  in  a  plan  of  thought,  in  logical  order, 
in  fitnpss,  in  proportion  ?  Is  transparency  never  beauti 
ful?  [Are  not  the  angles  of  a  star  beautiful  ?y  The 
truth  IS  that  there  may  be  very  great  beauty  in  an 
outline  of  a  sermon.  Clearness  of  statement,  finish  of 
form,  orderly  succession,  unity  of  aim,  completeness  as 
a  whole,  and  growth  in  construction  are  all  elements 
of  graceful  discourse.  By  having  framed  one  such 
division,  a  preacher  is  unconsciously  quickened.  The 
hearer,  too,  feels  the  magnetism  of  it,  though  uncon- 
scious of  its  origin. 

(7)  Divisions  may  be  made  to  assist  a  preacher  in 
meeting  without  loss  of  power  the  popular  demand  for 

^  brevity.     This   demand   is   a   threatening  evil.     Audi- 

^'^'"ences  wil\   not  tolerate  the  old  measuremimt  of  length 

r      of  sermons.    Preachers  can  not  control  the  public  taste. 

We  have  ODly  to  accept  it,  and  to  make  the  best  of  it. 

How  to  do  this  is  a  very  intricate  problem.     We  can 


cECT.  XXVI.]  THE  DIVISION :   NECESSITY.  373 

not  do  it  by  brevity  of  speech  alone.  Much  as  the 
popular  mind  craves  brevity,  it  will  not  now,  any  more 
than  it  would  a  century  ago,  tolerate  preaching  which 
has  no  solid  thought.  The  task  of  the  preacher,  there- 
fore, is  to  compress  into  the  smallest  possible  amount 
of  time  in  the  delivery  the  greatest  possible  amoimt  of 
solid  yet  interesting  matter. 

To  achieve  this,  well-framed  divisions  are  indispensa- 
ble. Short,  crisp  statements  of  the  salient  thoughts  of 
a  discourse  will  often  save  the  necessity  of  prolix  argu- 
ment. Statement  which  carries  in  itself  the  force  of 
argument  is  the  style  of  divisions  now  needed  in  the 
pulpit.  With  such  divisions  to  emphasize  the  imperial 
points  of  a  discourse,  you  can  pack  into  it  vastly  more 
material  than  can  by  any  ingenuity  be  put  into  the 
same  length  of  slipshod  harangue.  Take  some  of 
President  Finney's  sermons,  for  example.  Although 
he  carries  division  to  an  extreme,  yet  his  sermons 
show  illustriously  the  power  of  solid  thought,  when 
sharply  stated,  arranged  in.  rigorous  logical  .order,  and 
enforced  by  a  profound  evangelical  spirit.  One  of  hi? 
most  powerful  discourses  contains  thirty-one  of  these 
massive  blocks  of  thought,  some  of  them  with  no  am- 
plification whatever.  Few  preachers  of  our  own  age 
have  illustrated  so  splendidly  as  he  did  the  power  of 
^naked  truth  to  reach  the  human  conscience.  Such 
preaching  is  to  the  pulpit  what  the  telegraph  is  to  the 
press.{^  It  is  force  and  speed  combined  in  the  superla- 
tive degree.  )  Yet  it  would  be  impossible  without  a 
vigorous  and  constant  use  of  the  organizing  power, 
which  expresses  itself  in  good  divisions. 

(8)  Divisions  promote  intgrggt  in  a  discussion. 
This  they  do  by  promoting  clearness,  unity,  elegance, 
and  speed.     The  enthusiasm  of  the  preacher  is  most 


S^r'^^-'^-VK- 


374  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHINa.       [lect.  xxvt. 

vigorously  sustained  by  a  clear,  unified,  elegant,  pro- 
gressive plan  of  thought  before  him  as  a  model.  The 
act  of  framing  such  a  plan  creates  a  courageous  interest 
in  executing  the  details.  The  interest  of  the  hearer  is 
even  more  dependent  upon  good  divisions.  The  unity 
w'lich  they  create  prevents  the  tedium  of  confused 
thought;  and  nothing  is  more  tedious  than  confused 
thinking.  Their  elegant  structure  invites  interest  in 
their  expansion.  The  sense  of  progress  which  they 
quicken  stimulates  attention;  and  the  mental  rests 
which  they  furnish  relieve  the  weariness  of  prolonged 
attention.  Observe  the  rhetorical  structure  which  Cole- 
ridge has  given  to  the  essay  which  he  has  entitled 
"The  Friend."  He  introduces  several  excursus  from 
the  main  subject,  which  he  terms  "landing-places.** 
They  are  chiefly  a  rhetorical  device  for  relieving  the 
tedium  of  prolonged  and  abstract  discussion.  John 
Locke  would  have  sought  the  same  effect  by  means  of 
chapters  and  sections.  Sermons  find  the  same  relief  in 
the  expedient  of  divisions. 

Even  that  class  of  hearers  who  are  beguiled  by  false 
tastes  and  affectations  can  always  be  reined  up  to 
healthy  thinking  by  a  compact,  racy  statement  of  an 
elemental  truth,  like  those  which  divisions  should  ex- 
press. Plain  sense  pithily  uttered  will  catch  and  hold  a 
wandering  mind.  No  sane  man  ever  clears  himself 
wholly  from  common  sense.  Let  that  speak  in  concen- 
trated thought,  and  thought  wiU  spring  to  answer 
thought.  On  the  contrary,  that  style  of  discouj-se 
which  needs  no  divisions  is  not  weighty  enough  to 
produce  in  the  hearer  any  interest  which  demands 
religfX  It  may  please ;  it  may  entertain ;  it  may  excite 
curiosity;  it  may  reach  the  superficial  feelings:  but 
it  does  not  penetrat.e  profound  sensibilities;  the  great 


llr/v\J/^^ 


LBCT.  XXVI.]  THE  DIVISION :   NECESSITY.  375 

passions  are  not  moved  by  it;  hearts  are  not  swayed 
by  it.  ^It  is  a  style  of  thinking  which  resembles  the 
work  of  a  portrait-painter  who  was  noted  for  the  beauty 
of  his  faces  without  the  expression  of  character  in  them, 
and  whom  Chantry  criticised  by  saying,  that,  "  in  paint- 
ing a  head,  he  took  out  all  the  bones  and  all  the  brains." 

This  view  of  the  necessity  of  divisions  to  that  style 
of  thinking  which  most  deeply  moves  hearers  is  con- 
firmed by  the  fact  that  really  powerful  preachers  who 
havQ_J)een  theoretically  opposed  to  them  have  still  used 
them.  The  most  potent  arguments  against  them  which 
I  have  ever  seen  were  attributed  to  Robert  Hall.  Yet 
he  generally  employed  them.  Only  two  or  three  of 
his  published  sermons  appear  without  them ;  and  those 
were  occasional  sermons,  like  that  on  the  death  of  the 
Princess  Charlotte,  in  which  he  thought  it  necessary  to 
be  specially  literary  and  ornate.  In  his  ordinary  dis- 
courses, in  which  he  aimed  to  achieve  the  direct  busi- 
ness of  preaching,  he  found  them  necessary,  as  do  other 
preachers.  In  our  own  country,  no  man  has  contended 
against  the  fetters  of  divisions  more  earnestly  than  Dr. 
James  Alexander.  His  "  Thoughts  on  Preaching  "  is 
full  of  flings  at  them.  Yet  he,  also,  in  his  practice,  used 
them.  These  men  were  both  of  them  strong  preach- 
ers. They  found,  that,  theory  or  no  theory,  the  great 
strength  of  the  pulpit  can  not  find  utterance  without 
these  "  angular  "  expedients  of  logic. 

(9)  Divisions  promote  permanence  of  impression. 
We  may  safely  say,  that,  other  thSo^s  being  equal,  that 
is  the  best  sermon  which  furnishes  the  most  effective 
means  of  holding  it  in  the  memory.  The  most  effective 
of  such  means  commonly  are  the  text,  the  proposition, 
and  the  divisions.  These  are  the  parts  of  a  sermon 
which  usually  have  the  longest  life.    A  preacher,  above 


37b  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.        [ufiCT.  xxTl. 

all  other  public  speakers,  aims  at  lasting  impressions 
He  needs,  therefore,  as  many  expedients  as  are  natu- 
ral, to  make  truth  penetrate  the  memory.      Dr.  Lyman 
Beecher  used  to  tell  an  audience,  in  his  uncouth  way,  at 
the  clos3  of  a  division  which  was  vital  to  his  argument, 
f  exactly  what  he  wished  them   to  remember.     "  Hold 
\  that  fast,"  he  would  say ;  "  Nail  that  thought  down ; " 
j)  "Don't  let  this  slip  away ; "  "  Put  a  peg  in  there."    Just 
^    this  is  the  natural  working   of  clear,  concise,  orderly 
divisions.     They  are  the  "  nails  fastened  by  the  masters 
j  of  assemblies." 

i  I  have  dwelt  thus  long  upon  the  necessity  of  this 
\  expedient  in  sermonizing,  because  it  is  so  often  under- 
rated. The  present  drift  of  clerical  taste  underrates  it. 
Secular  literature  ignores  it.  Wit,  which  has  no  claim 
either  to  piety  or  to  literature,  makes  a  butt  of  it. 
Many  preachers,  therefore,  are  inclined  to  surrender  it 
as  an  antiquated  fixture  of  the  pulpit,  which  should  go 
with  the  sounding-board.  Yet  one  thing  is  noticeable  ; 
that  the  depreciation  of  the  use  of  divisions  accompa- 
nies the  depreciation  of  elaborate  preaching.  The  less 
esteem  a  preacher  has  for  them,  the  less  he  feels  for  the 
preaching  which  needs  them.  Argumentative  sermons, 
doctrinal  sermons,  intellectual  sermons,  long  sermons 
are  generally  decried  in  the  same  breath  which  pro- 
nounces against  divisions.  Talks,  exhortations,  pious 
remarks  take  the  place  of  sermons  in  the  practice  of 
s^ich  critics. 

By  this  review  of  the  necessity  of  divisions,  and  of 
the  style  of  thinking  in  sermons  which  divisions  repre- 
sent, I  am  reminded  of  whj^t  Pascal  has  said  of  the 
^geometrical  spirit."  He  contends  that  all  profoundest 
thinking  involves  a  tendency  to  geometrize.  That  is, 
it  involves  that  bent  of  mind  which  defines,  which 


,/^>^/i         '■"       ^/^2:otAK^A    a    PP^^^''^^^ 


LECT.  XXV J. J        THE  DIVISION :   EXPRESSION.  877 

proves,  which  demonstrates,  which  therefore  affirms 
positive]y  in  the  end.  Plato  said  of  the  Infinite 
Mind,  "  it  constantly  geometrizes."  This  drift  towards 
definitive  truth  is  characteristic  of  all  vigorous  preach- 
ing. As  we  observed  of  propositions,  so,  also,  is  it  true 
of  divisions,  that  they  represent  this  style  of  thinking 
in  the  pulpit ;  and  the  disuse  of  the  one  is  destructive 
to  the  other.  Cultivate,  then,  that  which  Pascal  calls 
the  geometrical  spirit.  Only  thus  can  you  fairly  de- 
liver the  inmost  spirit  of  Christianity.  Ours  is  one  of 
the  few  "  religions  of  the  book  "  which  the  world  has 
known.  It  claims  to  be  definite,  revealed,  positive, 
authoritative.  It  is  reason  addressed  to  reason,  and 
faith  commanding  faith.  To  speak  to  men  in  the  full 
spirit  of  it  we  must  "  geometrize."  We  must  construct. 
We  must  be  architects  and  builders.  Sermons  must  be 
elaborated  and  finished  structures.  No  other  part  of 
them  should  be  so  deftly  elaborated  as  the  inner  frame- 
work./ That  should  be  a  finished  mechanism,  even  if 
nothing  else  is  finished. 

II.  The  second  general  topic  in  the  treatment  of 
divisions  is  the  inquiry.  To  what  extent  should  visi- 
ble division  of  the  materials  of  a  sermon  be  carried? 
This  is  a  topic  on  which  we  should  keep  clear  of  artifi- 
cial rules.  Yet  certain  general  principles  every  preach- 
er's good  sense  can  apply  in  a  flexible  way. 

1st,  The  extent  of  division  should  be  regulated  pri- 
marily by  the  nature  of  the  subject. 

(1)  Some  subjects  repel  numerous  divisions.  \  A 
house  built  of  bamboo  could  scarcely  admit  of  a  second 
and  third  story.  iSo  a  theme  may  by  its  nature  be 
restricted  to  divisions  simple  and  few.  For  example, 
transparent  subjects  are  burdened,  if  treated  with  nu- 
merous divisions.      "The   value   of  the   soul,"  —  how 


878  THE  THEORST  OF  PEEACHINQ.        [lbct.  xxvt 

would  you  naturally  divide  a  sermon  on  this  theme? 
The  subject  is  commonplace;  the  best  materials  of 
thought  upon  it  are  painfully  so :  the  aim  of  a  sermon 
upon  it  is  clear  from  the  outset.  There  is  no  opportu- 
nity for  the  surprises  induced  by  an  unexpected  train 
of  tliought.  Is  it  natural  to  load  down  such  a  subject 
with  a  long  array  of  division  and  subdivision  ?  Obvi- 
ously not.  Division  and  subdivision  are  the  index  of 
elaboration.  A  public  speaker  must  be  watchful  of  his 
implications  as  well  as  of  his  expressions.  The  title  ol 
one  of  Fichte's  philosophical  tracts  is  this,  "A  state- 
ment, clear  as  the  sun,  of  the  true  nature  of  my  philoso- 
phy ;  or,  an  attempt  to  force  the  reader  to  understand." 
What  is  the  implication  in  such  a  title  ?  Either  that 
the  volmne  is  very  abstruse,  or  that  the  reader  is  very 
obtuse.  So  the  framework  of  a  sermon  may  have  its 
implications.  Elaborate  division  and  subdivision  imply 
their  own  necessity,  either  because  of  the  nature  of  the 
subject,  or  the  character  of  the  audience.  When,  there- 
fore, they  are  applied  to  a  very  simple  theme,  they 
awaken  a  sense  of  incongruity  by  the  contrast  of  great 
labor  with  easy  and  foreseen  result.  We  do  not  Hke 
to  be  dragged  laboriously  to  a  foregone  conclusion. 
Subjects,  also,  of  which  the  chief  use  is  to  appeal  to  the 
sensibilities  of  hearers  do  not  admit  of  numerous  di- 
visions. A  sermon  of  consolation  to  the  afflicted  could . 
scarcely  be  minutely  subdivided.  Divisions  are  the  I 
index,  not  of  an  emotive,  but  of  an  intellectual  process,  j 
Ihe  crisis  of  a  tragedy  can  not  naturally  be  developed 
in  the  form  of  a  syllogism. 

(2)  Some  subjects  demand  minute  division.  The 
necessity  of  analysis  is  evident  on  the  face  of  them. 
Subjects  on  which  the  truth  is  easily  misunderstood  or 
may  be  plausibly  perverted    may  require    numerous 


LEcrr.  XXVI.]         THE  DIVISION :    EXPRESSION  379 

divisions.  The  doiitriiie  of  decrees  is  one  of  the  dif- 
ficult subjects  of  discussion  in  the  pulpit ;  and  the 
difficulty  lies  largely  at  the  point  of  making  hearers 
understand  what  the  doctrine  is.  It  must  therefore  be 
analyzed,  distinguished  from  what  it  is  not,  defeLded 
against  perversions,  shown  to  be  a  necessary  outgrowth 
of  any  form  of  divine  government.    It  is  one  of  a  class 

of  themes  on  which  we  not  only  must  distinguish  truth 

from  error,  but  must  as  carefully  distinguish  truth  from 
truth.  Proportion  and  perspective  are  every  thing  in 
such  discussions.  In  like  manner,  truths  which  are 
open  to  many  and  intricate  objections  often  need  to  be 
treated  with  numerous  divisions.  The  doctrines  of  de- 
pravitys_of  _prayer,  of  the  Trinity,  are  exposed  to  a  ~ 
multitude  of  objections.  So  far  as  they  go,  the  objec- 
tions are  forcible.  Around  all  the  centers  of  Christian 
thought  real  difficulties  are  dense.  If  such  truths  are  to 
be  thoroughly  handled,  objections  must  be  fairly  stated, 
and  conclusively  answered.  This  requires  divisions 
proportioned  to  the  points  to  be  discussed.  Guarded  _ 
statement,  explanation,  assertion  qualified  by  assertion, 
truth  balanced  by  truth,  proof  multiplied  upon  proof, 
—  in  a  word,  all  the  arts  germane  to  logic,  may  be 
needed  to  disentangle  such  truths  from  the  crowd  of 
real  difficulties  which  surround  them  in  the  minds  of 
hearers. 

Further :  subjects  which  are  very  prolific  of  practical 
applications  may  need  numerous  divisions.  Of  some 
themes  the  distinguishing  feature  is  their  marvelous 
fecundity  in  practical  applications.  They  branch  out 
into  innumerable  uses.  You  can  not  unfold  their  afflu- 
ence without  stating  and  distinguishing  those  uses. 
The  natural  vehicle  for  their  conveyance  is  divisions. 

(3)  One   general  principle,  therefore,  which  should 


380  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.        [lect.  xxvl 

regulate  the  extent  of  divisions  is  this,  that,  the  more 
severely  the  subject  tasks  the  mind,  the  more  imperative 
is  the  need  of  a  thorough  division  of  materials.  Even 
when  the  power  of  intellection  's  not  severely  tasked, 
the  power  of  recollection  may  be. 

2d,  The  extent  of  division  must  be  regulated,  in 
pa^t,  by  the  character  of  the  discussion  proposed.  The 
game  subject  may  admit  of  a  difficult  or  a  facile  dis- 
cussion. An  argumentative  discussion  obviously  de- 
niands  more  careful  division  than  an  exhortation.  An 
explanatory  discussion  may  require  a  more  thorough 
analj^sis  of  the  materials  than  an  argument  on  a  subject 
well-known.  A  polemic  discussion  may  call  for  more 
cautious  and  muMpITed  distinctions  than  a  practical 
treatment  of  a  truth  undisputed.  A. _  comprehensive 
discussion  would  clearly  necessitate  more  numerous 
divisions  than  one  of  restricted  range.  I  name  these 
particulars  only  to  enforce  the  principle  which  they  all 
illustrate,  that  division  should  equal,  not  exceed,  the 
demands  of  the  discussion.  To  determine  what  those 
demands  are  criticism  can  not  go  back  of  the  good 
sense  of  the  preacher. 

3d,  The  extent  of  division  must  be  regulated,  in 
part,  by  the  character  of  the  audience  addressed.  An 
audience  of  children  would  demand  that  divisions  be 
few.  But  they  would  demand,  also,  subjects  and  dis- 
cussions which  require  but  few  divisions.  An  unculti- 
vated audience  of  any  kind  would  require  that  divisions 
be  moderate  in  number  and  degree.  To  an  undisciplined 
mind,  multiplied  or  intricate  divisions  are  as  burden- 
some as  a  labyrinth  of  thought  undivided.  But  no 
audience  is  independent  of  divisions  in  any  elaborate 
discourse.  It  is  a  mistake  to  trust  to  the  intelliger  ce 
even  of  a  select  audience  to  follow  an  elaborate  tr  io 


LBOT.  XXVI.]         THE  DIVISION ;    EXPRESSION.  381 

of  thought,  without  the  helps  to  perspicuity  which 
visible  divisions  furnish. 

4th,  The  extent  of  division  must  be  regulated,  m 
part,  by  the  time  at  command  in  preaching.  You  will 
soon  discover  that  the  same  amount  of  material  can  be 
presented  in  less  time  with  only  a  general  division  than 
with  a  general  division  and  a  subdivision.  Every  divis- 
ion is  a  rest.  Its  statement  requires  time.  The  chief 
change  which  the  outline  of  a  discourse  often  needs  is 
to  abandon  subdivisions,  and  to  throw  the  salient 
thoughts  into  one  continuous  series.  /The  difference 
between  the  two  methods  is  like  that  between  a  way- 
train  and  an  express-train.  You  traverse  the  same 
distance  at  different  rates  of  speed,  because  with  dif- 
ferent numbers  of  rests.      ) 

More  definite  rules  than  these  are  impracticable. 
But  a  sensible  study  of  these  criteria  enables  us  to 
pass  judgment  upon  certain  abuses  of  divisions  which 
have  brought  them  into  disrepute.  The  application  of 
these  principles  to  those  abuses  will  be  considered  in 
the  next  lecture. 


LECTURE  XXVII. 

THE    DIVISION:    EXPEESSION,    MATEEIALS. 

*v  6th,  Continuing  the  discussion  of  the  visible  expres- 

^  I     sIdu  of  divisions,  we  notice  in  the  fifth  place  certain 
obvious  abuses  of  divisions. 
I  (1)  Of  these   may  be  named  first  the  employment 

V  of  any  arbitrary  number.  William  Jay  says  that  he 
commonly  made  his  sermons  consist  of  five  divisions. 
But  why  five,  rather  than  seven,  or  three?  A  fixed 
number  for  which  no  reason  can  be  given  is  an  abuse. 
An  ancient  conceit  of  the  pulpit  was  that  of  assigning 
to  divisions  some  one  of  the  so-called  "sacred"  num- 
bers, —  five,  seven,  twelve,  forty. 

The  more  frequent  error  of  this  class  was  one,  relics 
of  which  remain   to   this  day.     It  was  that  of  a  pre- 
scribed threefold  division  in  honor  of  the  Trinity.     It 
is  marvelous  in  how  many  different  ways  the  piety  of 
the  mediaeval  Church  expressed  its  reverence  for  this 
central  doctrine  of  Christianity.    The  same  spirit  which 
f  .       led  to  the  building  of  a  church  in  the  form  of  a  cross, 
9^*^     and  to  the  cross  in  window-sashes  and  in  the  paneling 
^jirt^  of  doors,  induced  preachers  to  work  the  idea  of  trinity 
into  the  mechanism  of  sermons.     The  mediaeval  mind 
saw  trinity  in  every  thing,  from  the  Mosaic  record  o^ 
creation  down  to  a  three-leaved  clover.     One   of  ths 
developments  of  this  fancy  was  that  of  the  trinitarian 


LKOT.  xxvn.]       THE  DIVISION :    EXPRESSION.  883 

division  of  a  sermon.  No  matter  what  the  subject,  or 
its  mode  of  treatment,  the  sermon  must  be  confined  or 
stretched,  with  pfocrustean  uniformity,  to  three  parts, 
no  more,  and  no  less.  Some  of  our  elder  clergy,  within 
my  recollection,  adhered  to  this  as  a  matter  of  taste, 
perhaps  without  knowing  its  real  origin.  I  once  heard 
a  sermon  before  an  association  of  clergymen  approved 
for  consisting  of  three  general  divisions,  each  of  which 
had  three  subdivisions,  each  of  these  being  developed 
with  three  leading  thoughts,  and  all  followed  by  three 
inferences  in  the  conclusion,  and  ending  with  the  Trini- 
tarian Doxology.  (The  preacher  should  have  delivered 
it  in  a  three-cornered  hat.  /Such  a  discourse  is  a  misera- 
ble piece  of  trichotomy.  The  taste  which  could  delight 
in  it  is  Like  that  which  enjoys  anagrams  and  acrostics. 
Persuasive  speech  is  infinitely  above  it. 

(2)  A  lawless  multiplication  of  divisions  is  an  abuse. 
Charnock's  discourse  on  "  The  Being  of  God  "  has  one 
hundred  and  two  divisions;  and  his  discourse  on  "Spir- 
itual Worship  "  has  one  hundred  and  ten.  One  of  his 
contemporaries  preached  to  the  extent  of  one  hundred 
and  seventy  divisions.  This  is  not  yet  an  antiquated 
abuse.  De  Quincey's  article  on  Hume's  argument 
against  miracles,  though  limited  to  twenty-four  pages, 
has  thirty-seven  divisions ;  and  another  article  from  the 
same  pen,  of  but  thirty  pages,  has  forty-one  divisions. 
Su3h  models  are  no  more  trustworthy  than  any  other 
mania.  (  Never  whittle  a  subject  for  the  amusement  of  it.    J 

(3)  Uniformity  in  the  number  of  divisions  is  an 
abuse.  Sermons  should  never  be  divided  by  habit.  If  ' 
you  find  yourself  constructing  every  discourse  with 
about  the  same  number  of  general  divisions,  and  about 
the  same  number  of  subdivisions,  and  about  the  same 
number  of  inferences  and  remarks,  be  assured  that  you 


384  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHINQ.       [lbtt.  xxvn 

are  falling  into  a  mechanism  of  the  pen.  The  life  of 
your  pulpit  is  dying  out.  The  demands  of  subjects, 
of  discussions,  and  of  audiences,  if  well  considered  and 
obeyed,  will  necessitate  variety. 

(4)  Generally  it  is  an  abuse  to  extend  division  beyond 
the  second  degree.  Subdivisions  ~of  "'subdivisions  will 
rarely,  if  ever,  be  distinguished  as  such  by  hearers. 
Few  subjects  which  are  fit  for  oral  address  in  the  pulpit 
need  them,  and  common  audiences  are  confused  by 
them.  In  listening  to  such  a  sermon,  the  hearer,  if  his 
patience  is  not  exhausted,  is  constantly  feeling  about 
mentally  for  the  thread  of  discourse.  But  the  great 
majority  of  ordinary  hearers  do  not  attempt  to  follow 
such  a  sermon  at  all.  Whatever  they  get  from  it  is  in 
"shreds  and  patches,"  here  and  there.  Consecutive 
discourse  to  them  it  is  not. 

(5)  Yisible  division  is  an  abuse,  so  far  as  it  is  framed 
for  the  convenience  of  the  speaker  alone.  A  good 
speaker  must  have  more  elaborate  divisions  in  his  own 
mind  than  a  good  hearer  needs.  Orderly  discourse  can 
not  exist  ideally  without  many  invisible  sections.  To 
the  speaker  it  is  a  convenience  to  state  these  visibly ; 
but  to  the  hearer  this  statement  may  complicate  and 
encumber  the  subject.  Concealment  of  your  subdivis- 
ion, therefore,  may  be  a  necessity  to  moral  impression, 
if  not  to  rhetorical  perspicuity.  Yet  often  the  preach- 
er's convenienoe  overrides  his  practice.  He  maps  out, 
the  discussion  with  excess  of  form,  for  his  own  use  only. 

(6)  Visible  division  is  an  abuse  so  far  as  it  exceeds 
the  necessities  of  elaboration.  This,  again,  is  most 
frequently  illustrated  in  needless  subdivisions.  Visible 
subdivision  is  elaborate  form  representing  elaborate 
thinking.  It  is  diagram  representing  science.  Beyond 
the  necessities  of  elaboration,  form  becomes  not  only 


LEOT.  XXVII.]       THE  DIVISION :   EXPRESSION.  885 

an  incumbrance,  but,  what  is  worse,  an  affectation ;  for 
it  pretends  to  an  intricacy  which  does  not  exist.  It 
thrusts  upon  the  hearer  a  help  which  he  does  not  need. 
It  is  like  offering  him  a  telescope  to  find  his  neighbor's 
house.  The  result  is,  that  no  one  is  relieved,  but  every 
one  is  encumbered.  / 

(7)  Visible  division  is  an  abuse,  so  far  as  it  out  j 
weighs  rhetorical  force.  In  all  oral  speech,  and  spe  X 
cially  in  preaching,  results  depend  much  more  on  rhetor  > 
ical  impression  than  on  scientific  form.  Science  must  _ 
therefore  often  yield  to  rhetoric  in  the  structure  and 
expansion  of  a  sermon.  Its  structure  must  depend  on 
its  proposed  expansion.  Its  frame  must  be  such  that  it 
can  be  expanded  forcibly.  The  table  of  contents  of  a 
book  may  be  very  perfect  as  a  scientific  structure ;  but 
it  is  dull  reading,  because  it  has  no  rhetorical  force. 
It  has  no  expansion :  it  is  all  form.  It  has  as  little  elo- 
qiience  as  a  triangle.  So  a  sermon  may  be  divided  and 
subdivided  till  it  is  little  else  than  a  skeleton.  A  ser- 
mon of  superior  materials  may  break  down  under  this 
excess  of  machinery.  It  may  be  elaborately  thought 
out  and  as  elaborately  framed:  its  divisions  may  be 
accurate,  and  their  order  natural.  As  a  scientific  lec- 
ture it  may  be  a  model ;  but  as  a  sermon  it  is  arid  and 
brittle :  it  wants  spring,  speed,  wings.  The  first  step  in 
its  improvement  is  to  reduce  its  weight  of  form,  aban< 
don  the  double  for  the  single  series  of  divisions,  make 
science  succumb  to  rhetoric.  You  will  soon  discover 
that  the  single  series  of  divisions  is  more  easily  handled 
than  the"  double  'series  in  rhetorical  expansion.  It  is 
more  flexible.  Said  Prior  of  Dr.  Johnson,  "His  rea- 
soning is  marshaled  with  the  exactness  of  a  heraldic 
procession,  or  the  rank  and  file  of  an  army."  Some- 
thing is  wrong  in  a  discourse  in  which  that  sense  of 


32: 


386  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.       [uEcrr.  xxvn 

ordei  is  lifted  above  the  sense  of  force.  Specially  in 
the  pulpit  our  concern  is  chiefly  with  truth  in  its  rhe- 
torical rather  than  in  its  scientific  forms.  We  must 
divide  and  arrange  discourse  as  orators,  not  as  scientific 
•^  lecturers,  nor  as  academic  teachers. 

III.  The  third  general  topic  of  the  discussions  before 
us  is  that  of  the  materials  of  divisions;  that  is,  the 
thoughts  of  which  they  should  be  composed.  Respect- 
ing these,  the  following  are  the  fundamental  principles. 

1st,  A  division  of  a  discourse  should  be  necessary  to 
the  development  of  its  proposition.  The  proposition  is 
the  plan  in  the  germ :  the  plan  is  the  proposition  un- 
folded. Every  division  in  the  plan,  therefore,  should 
be  essential  to  the  expansion  of  the  proposition.  It 
should  grow  out  of  the  proposition,  and  live  upon  the 
proposition,  as  a  branch  grows  out  of  and  lives  upon 
the  root  of  a  tree.  It  should  be  impossible  to  see  how 
the  proposition  in  hand  could  dispense  with  the  di- 
vision in  hand. 

Preachers  may  learn  a  lesson  from  the  best  writers  of 
fiction.  They  study  the  necessities  of  the  narrative. 
They  keep  to  the  probabilities  of  history.  Mr.  Dickens 
tells  us,  that,  while  he  was  publishing  "  The  Old  Curi 
osity  Shop  "  as  a  serial  story,  he  received  letters  from 
friends  and  strangers  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic,  beg- 
ging him  not  to  give  a  tragic  ending  to  the  story  by 
the  death  of  "  little  Nell."  But  those  letters  were  to 
his  mind  evidence  that  the  tragic  ending  was  the  ne- 
cessary one,  because  the  only  natural  one.  Else,  why 
did  readers  forebode  it  ?  That  instinctive  foreboding 
was  an  instinctive  decree  of  art.  So  Mr.  Dickens  rea- 
soned, and  he  refused  to  obey  the  suggestions  of  his 
correspondents.  This  kind  of  study  of  the  necessities 
of  a  theme  is  needed  in  the  construction  of  sermons. 


LBCT.  xxvu.]        THE  DIVISION :   MATERIALS.  387 

We  can  not  neglect  it,  and  yet  present  truth  in  natu- 
ral relations. 

(1)  To  be  necessary  to  a  proposition,  a  division  must 
be  comprised  in  that  proposition.  Lord  Bacon  once 
theorized  that  a  birch-tree  might  grow  from  the  root  of 
a  felled  oak.  Divisions  are  sometimes  grafted  upon 
propositions  on  a  similar  theory.  A  division  is  often 
relevant  to  the  general  subject  when  it  is  not  so  to  the 
proposition.  (It  belongs  to  the  same  genus,  but  does 
not  come  under  the  species.  '  The  preacher  is  deceived, 
and  classifies  loosely.  Your  proposition  is  to  consider 
the  doctrine  of  intercession :  why,  then,  should  a  divis- 
ion be  given  to  remarks  upon  prayer  in  the  general  ? 
Your  proposition  is  to  treat  of  the  sin  of  ingratitude : 
why,  then,  devote  a  division  to  depravity?  Your 
proposition  is  to  urge  the  duty  of  repentance:  why, 
then,  bestow  a  division  upon  a  general  exhortation  to 
a  religious  life?  Much  aimless  preaching  would  be 
avoided,  if  preachers  would  adhere  more  rigidly  to  the 
distinction  that  relevancy  to  subject  is  not  necessarily 
relevancy  to  proposition. 

This  principle,  again,  is  sometimes  violated  by  an 
unphilosophical  use  of  biblical  passages  parallel  to  the 
text.  Some  preachers,  with  the  laudable  aim  of  being 
biblical  preachers,  make  an  unwarranted  use  of  their 
reference  Bibles.  I  can  not  better  illustrate  this  error 
than  by  citing  some  fragments  from  Dr.  James  Alex* 
ander.  Of  his  own  method  of  sermonizing  at  one 
period  of  his  ministry  he  writes,  "Another  method 
which  I  pursued  was  to  choose  a  text,  and  then,  having 
written  out  in  full  all  the  parallel  passages,  to  classify 
them,  and  fouiid  my  divisions  on  this  classification.  I 
flattered  myself  that  this  was  a  happy  method,  because 
it  made  my  sermon  scriptural." 


888  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       [lbct.  xxvd 

But  observe  this  method  for  a  moment.  "  Class^'fica- 
tion"  of  what?  Of  the  materials  of  the  text^  No. 
Of  the  materials  of  a  proposition  derived  from  the  text  ? 
No.  Of  the  natural  surroundings  of  the  text  or  theme  ? 
No.  But  of  the  parallel  passages  found  in  Bagster's 
Bible.  It  is  impossible  that  such  divisions  shoul(^  fail 
to  contain  irrelevant  material.  Dr.  Alexander  soon 
found  this  out,  and  ingenuously  confesses  it.  He  says, 
"  The  nexus  between  the  texts  was  factitious,  often  re- 
fmed  and  recondite,  always  more  obvious  to  the  writer 
than  to  the  reader.  It  prevented  the  flow  of  thought 
in  a  natural  channel.  It  was  like  a  number  of  lakes 
connected  by  artificial  canals.  The  discourse  was  dis- 
jointed, and  over-laden  with  texts.  One  passage  of 
Scripture  suggested  unsought  is  worth  a  hundred 
lugged  in  collo  obtortor  All  artifices  for  making  a 
sermon  scriptural  defeat  themselves.  Biblical  thought 
runs  in  natural  channels.  <y  It  is  all  in  rivers,  never  in 
canals,  i  Force  it  into  canals,  and  you  get  nothing  but 
stagnant  water. 

(2)  To  be  necessary  to  a  proposition,  a  division  must 
be  founded  on  a  real  distinction  from  every  other  divis- 
ion. Distinction  without  real  diJfference  is  often  the 
defect  of  two  consecutive  divisions.  Difference  of 
phraseology  is  accepted  as  difference  of  thought.  Dif- 
ference in  the  materials  of  development  may  conceal 
the  fact  that  there  is  no  difference  of  divisions.  Mas- 
sillon,  in  one  of  his  charges  to  his  clergy,  discourses 
on  "  The  Spirit  of  the  Ministry  of  the  Gospel "  as  being ; 
1.  A  spirit  of  separation  from  the  world;  2.  A  spirit 
of  prayer;  3.  A  spirit  of  zeal;  4.  A  spirit  of  labor; 
6.  A  spirit  of  knowledge;  6.  A  spirit  of  piety.  Of 
these  divisions  the  last  is  inclusive  of  all  the  rest. 

(3)  To  be  necessary  to  a  proposition,  a  division  must 


Qyr^d^^y^KX.^^^  Jr^ 


LECT.  xxvn.]        THE  DIVISION :   MATERIALS.  380 

be  founded  on  an  important  distinction  from  all  the 
other  divisions.  One  variety  of  error  in  this  respect  is 
very  deceptive.  It  is  that  in  which  a  division  unim- 
portant in  itself  is  advanced  for  the  sake  of  interesting 
materials  which  can  be  introduced  under  it.  We  some- 
times hear  discourses  in  which  the  divisions  give  no 
hint  of  the  materials  of  interest  in  the  discussion.  The 
salient  things  in  the  discourse  are  not  the  leading 
thoughts:  they  are  incidents,  illustrations^  antitheses, 
quotations,  paradoxes,  or  other  artful  expedients  of 
composition.  They  do  not  suggest  the  ground-work 
of  thought ;  nor  are  they  forcibly  suggested  by  it.  The 
outline  of  the  sermon,  therefore,  is  not  needed  for  its 
own  sake.  It  is  only  the  string  for  the  beads.  Such 
selection  of  the  materials  of  division  is  unnatural ;  yet, 
executed  by  a  genius,  it  may  be  delusive.  Some 
fascinating  composition  of  this  kind  is  found  in  all 
literatures.  It  is  the  chief  defect  in  the  writings  of 
De  Quincey.  His  "  Confessions  of  an  Opium-Eater  "  in 
an  entire  volume  constructed  in  this  way.  He  him- 
self so  describes  it.  A  discourse  thus  framed  may 
contain  passages  of  great  power  and  brilliancy;  but 
as  a  structure  of  thought  it  is  unnatural.  The  power 
to  write  in  this  way  is  a  dangerous  one :  it  tempts  a 
preacher  to  artifice  and  clap-trap. 

2d,  A  second  principle  respecting  the  materials  of 
divisions  is  the  converse  of  the  one  last  named.  It  is 
that  the  divisions  as  a  whole  should  fullv  develop  the 
proposition.  Not  only  should  no  needless  divisions  be 
introduced,  but  no  necessary  divisions  should  be  omit- 
ted. Collectively  the  divisions  should  be  a  complete 
discussion  of  the  proposition. 

(1)  Upon  this  topic,  observe  a  principle  which  we 
have  had  occasion  to  notice  before,  —  that  exhaustion 


^:.^  >-i~^^  iA<r'vi^ 


590  THE  THEORY  OF  J'REACHING.       [uicn:.  xxm. 

of  a  proposition  is  not  exhaustion  of  a  subject.  The 
prolix  discourses  of  some  of  the  English  and  Scotch 
divines  grew  out  of  a  failure  to  recognize  this  distinc- 
tion. Hence  their  interminable  divisions.  Their  con- 
clusions especially  are  omniferous.  They  include 
applicatory  divisions  sufficient  for  two  or  three  dis- 
courses. A  doctrine  thus  treated  is  like  a  light  in  a 
grotto  of  gems.  The  glow  of  the  wealth  discovered 
is  dazzling;  but  beyond  the  confused  sense  of  affluence 
of  applicatory  thought  one  receives  n^  impression. 
\V  No  focal  density  of  thought  attracts  us.  This  is  the 
necessary  result  of  an  attempt  to  exhaust  a  great 
/"'•^^^^  subject. 

\  "^  >  (2)  That  divisions  may  fully  develop  a  proposition, 
V.-^"  the  proposition  and  divisions  should  be  so  invented  as 
to  fit  together.  There  are  always  two  ways  of  fitting 
two  things  to  each  other :  you  may  stretch  the  one,  or 
contract  the  other.  A  very  common  illustration  of  this 
occurs  in  the  adjustment  of  propositions  to  divisions 
by  the  use  of  a  qualif}dng  word  or  phrase  in  the  form 
of  the  proposition.  You  wish,  for  instance,  to  consider 
the  reasons  for  a  certain  duty ;  but  you  find  that  you 
can  not  discuss  all  those  reasons.  Perhaps  you  do  not 
know  them  all.  It  is  hazardous  to  promise  all  the  rea- 
sons for  any  thing.  Perhaps  you  have  not  time  to  dis- 
cuss them  all :  yet  you  can  discuss  a  certain  group  of 
tliem,  which  shall  have  weight  and  unity.  What  shall 
be  done?  Qualify  your  proposition  by  some  modal 
phrase.  Say,  "  Let  us  consider  some  of  the  reasons ;  " 
or,  "  a  few  of  the  reasons ; "  or,  "  the  more  important 
reasons,"  etc.  A  study  of  the  proposition  and  the  divis- 
ions relatively  to  each  other  is  needful  in  order  to  dis- 
close where  the  proper  guard  is  to  be  applied  against 
the  danger  of  a  failure  to  match. 


/KA^i^5r  /    JLl^Jj^K 


huxst.  xxm.]        THE  DIVISION .   MATERIALS.  S91 

(3)  Divisions  do  not  fully  develop  a  prt  position,  if 
they  do  not  sustain  its  intrinsic  dignity.  A  profound 
proposition  superficially  treated,  an  affluent  theme 
meagerly  treated,  a  novel  subject  tritely  treated  indi- 
cate unfortunate  omissions,  which  the  divisions  ought 
to  have  supplied.  On  the  standard  themes  of  the  pul- 
pit a  certain  fund  of  popular  thought  exists  below 
which  a  sermon  on  one  of  those  themes  ought  not  to 
fall.  They  are  great  subjects.  They  are  susceptible 
of  such  discussion  as  shall  produce  a  great  impression. 
The  popular  mind  feels  them  to  be  great,  and  as  such 
reveres  them.  The  history  of  the  pulpit  has  made  them 
great  in  their  homiletic  forms.  Great  minds  have 
discoursed  upon  them,  and  lifted  them  to  a  lofty  niche 
in  the  popular  conceptions  of  them.  Very  unequal 
sermons  may  be  preached  upon  them  by  unequal  minds. 
But  a  meager  sermon  upon  one  of  them  should  never 
be  preached  by  any  one.  More  evil  than  good  would 
be  the  natural  result  of  such  a  sermon.  If  we  can  not 
confirm  the  work  of  our  predecessors  in  the  discussion 
of  the  grand  themes  of  the  pulpit,  we,  at  least,  should 
not  undo  it  by  our  imbecility.  For  such  subjects,  our 
best  efforts  should  be  reserved.  Our  best  health,  our 
most  profound  and  penetrative  studies,  our  ,mpst  elastic 
moods,  our  most  affluent  religious  experiences  should 
be  expended  upon  them.  Even  thus,  we  shall  not  equal 
these  imperial  themes.  But  we  may  equal,  and  more 
than  equal,  the  existing  popular  thought  upon  them. 
If  not,  our  call  to  preach  needs  revision. 

The  most  serious  omissions  in  preaching  are  of 
materials  the  absence  of  which  obscures  the  evan- 
gelical spirit  of  the  discourse.  If  a  subject  naturally 
leads  thought  to  Christ,  it  is  the  saddest  of  all  omis- 
sions to  leave  out  Christ.     Yet  this  may  be  done  with 


392  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       [lbct.  xxvn 

no  irreverent  design.  I  once  heard  a  sermon  on  "  The 
Holiness  of  God,"  the  divisions  of  which  were  restricted 
to  the  intimations  of  divine  holiness  in  the  material 
universe.  Yet  it  is  impossible  to  develop  that  subject 
well,  without  assigning  the  central  place  to  the  illustra^ 
tration  of  ib  furnished  by  the  divine  work  of  Atone- 
ment for  the  sins  of  man.  The  sermon  disclosed  this 
by  its  glaring  omissions.  Intellectually  considered,  it 
was  a  superior  production  ;  but  it  was  well-nigh  useless 
as  a  sermon  on  that  theme.  If  the  proposition  had 
been  to  consider  "  The  intimations  of  the  divine  holi- 
ness in  the  material  universe,"  and  only  those,  the  case 
would  have  been  entirely  changed,  and  the  evil  avoided. 
The  divisions  then  would  have  matched  the  proposition. 
But  as  they  stood  the  proposition  pointed  to  the  center, 
and  the  divisions  to  the  outskirts,  of  the  theme.  The 
very  heart  of  it,  as  it  opens  to  a  thoughtful  mind, 
was  left  a  blank/^  Sermons  which  thus  omit  the  evan- 
[        gelical  elements  of  a  subject  are  as  ungainly  as  they  are 

V  'I       inefficient.^  The  loss  of  a  limb  is  a  deformity  as  well  as 
*         an  inconvenience.     But  what  of  the  loss  of  a  head? 

"\    ^         3d,  A   third  principle    respecting  the   materials   of 
divisions    is   that    they   should    consist    of   the    most 
powerful    thoughts    which   a   mastery   of  the   subject 
discovers.      Two    things   in   this   principle  are   to   be 
emphasized,  —  mastery  of  subjects,  and   the  use   only 
of   selected    materials.      Defect   in    either  is  loss   of 
power. 
^  /  I    (1)  The  secret  of  weakness  in  many  sermons  is  pre 
(        mature  discussion.     A  glance  at  the  outline  of  a  dis 
course  is  often  sufficient  to  show  that  the  preacher  is 
not  ready  to  discuss  that  theme.     He  has  not  mastered 
it.     He  has  worked  in  the  dark.      Collateral  bearings 
of  it  hav®  not  been  well  explored.    The  divisions  are 


LBOT.  xxvn.]        THE  DIVISION :   MATERIALS.  393 

inadequate,  because  he  has  not  had  the  subject  well  in 
hand.  Statements  are  made,  therefore,  which  need  to 
be  qualified,  or  understatements  are  made  which  need 
to  be  intensified.  Till  you  know  a  subject  all  around 
and  all  through,-  you  are  not  competent  to  affirm  with 
confidence  any  broad  range  of  discussion  respecting  it. 

(2)  A  still  more  frequent  evil  is  poverty  of  materials. 
This,  too,  the  plan  of  a  sermon  will  often  discover. 
The  divisions  are  not  the  rich  products  of  a  full  mind. 
They  are  not  select  mateiials.  They  hint  at  no  un- 
spoken reserves.  In  discouise,  as  in  war,  power  often 
lies  in  reserved  forces.  The  possession  of  such  unex- 
pressed resources  affects  the  \^hole  movement  of  mas- 
terly discussion.  Without  that  mastery  of  subjects 
which  allows  selection,  a  discouise  can  not  be  radically 
Hrengthened  by  criticism  of  det«\ls.  Criticism  must 
go  back  to  the  preliminary  study  uf  the  theme. 

(3)  The  view  here  expressed  should  modify  the 
objections  often  urged  against  "great"  sermons.  In- 
tellectual preaching  is  objectionable  only  so  far  as  the 
intellectual  strain  is  disproportioned  to  the  spiritual 
fervor.  In  this  one  principle  of  proportion  lies  the 
gist  of  the  whole  argument  on  the  subject.  This  bal- 
ance being  well  preserved,  it  may  be  safely  said,  that, 
the  more  intellectual  our  preaching  is,  the  better  it  is. 
This  is  as  true  as  is  its  converse, — that,  *ihe  more 
spiritual  preaching  is,  the  better  it  is.  Each  element 
is  the  complement  of  the  other  in  the  true  idral  of  a 
sermon. 

There  is  a  very  obvious  sense,  then,  in  whioI»  ser- 
nons  must  be  "great."  They  must  embody  the  best 
aaaterials  germane  to  their  subjects;  and  this,  realized 
in  any  pulpit,  will,  in  the  long-run,  create  a  "  g?-  nt " 
pulpit.     In  no  other  way  can  we  eradicate  froir    IN 


?M  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.      [lect. 


popular  miDd  effeminate  and  quiddling  tastes,  which,  if 
encouraged,  doom  the  pulpit  to  degeneracy.  You  can 
not  improve  such  tastes  by  preaching  to  them  or  at 
them.  The  way  to  lift  the  people  above  them  is  not  by 
a  direct  dead  lift,  but  by  a  certain  leverage  of  preaching 
which  can  not  be  understood  by  a  weak  or  listless  mind. 
To  create  strength,  you  must  give  strength.  Put  into 
your  pulpit  the  strength  of  the  everlasting  hills,  and  it 
will  not  need  the  coruscations  of  the  Aurora  horealis. 
Give  to  your  preaching  the  vividness  of  the  lightning, 
and  your  people  will  not  crave  the  phosphorescence  of 
fireflies. 

In  an  age  like  ours,  no  pulpit  can  succeed,  which,  like 
^the  pulpit  of  Germany,  lives,  in  large  disproportion, 
upon  the  natural  spirituality  of  womanhood  and  the 
innocence  of  childhood.  These  must  be  supplemented 
by  the  intellectual  strength  of  a  nation,  or  the  pulpit 
can  not  exist  as  a  national  power.  And,  to  command 
the  strength,  it  must  he  strength.  Great  and  timely 
subjects,  thorough  discussions,  weight  and  fullness  of 
selected  materials,  costly  thoughts,  —  these,  immersed 
in  the  depths  of  an  intense  spiritual  nature,  must  con- 
stitute the  popular  preaching  of  the  age,  or  the  time 
is  not  distant  when  no  preaching  will  be  popular. 
All  this  reduced  to  few  and  plain  words  means  that 
we  must  have  great  preachers,  who  shall  give  great 
sermons  on  great  themes,  composed  of  the  best  ma- 
terials which  such  themes  furnish  to  an  educated  mind. 
To  the  utmost  of  each  one's  ability  we  must  be  such 
preachers ;  and  each  one's  conscien'je  must  be  trained, 
by  a  thoughtful  rather  than  an  effervescent  piety,  to 
bear  the  irtsUectual  strain  which  such  preaching 
creates. 

Is   this  theory  a  temptation  to   clerical  ambition? 


LECT.  xxvn.]        THE  DIVISION :   MATERIALS.  895 

Yes:  it  is  open  to  that  abuse.  But  the  peril  must 
be  met,  as  other  moral  perils  must  be,  in  doing  the 
work  of  a  world's  necessity.  The  greater  the  deed, 
the  greater  the  probationary  peril  in  the  doing:  this 
is  the  law  of  all  great  achievement.  The  supreme 
temptation  in  this  world's  history  assailed  Him  who 
came  to  it  in  supreme  self-sacrifice.  The  trial,  so  far 
as  we  can  judge  of  it,  came  in  this  very  form  of  appeal 
to  His  human  ambition,  through  the  dawning  conscious- 
ness of  divine  power  over  divine  opportunity.  Similar 
is  the  moral  danger  of  an  intellectual  pulpit;  and 
that  is  tyranny  over  a  weak  conscience  which  holds  a 
preacher  back  from  the  encounter  by  religious  scruples. 


LECTURE  XXVni, 

THE  DIVISION:   MATEBIALS,   FOEM. 

f  4th,  a  fourth  principle  respecting  the  materials  of 
divisions  is  that  they  should  all  be  classified,  if  possible, 
upon  the  same  principle  of  division. 

(1)  Materials  are  often  arranged  on  different  princi- 
ples of  division.  A  truth  may  be  discussed  subjectively 
by  considering  its  nature,  or  objectively  by  considering 
its  effects.  It  may  be  treated  negatively  or  positively. 
It  may  be  developed  by  argument,  or  by  illustration,  or 
by  explanation,  or  by  exhortation.  It  may  be  discussed 
under  any  one  of  a  great  variety  of  relations. 

(2)  Sometimes  a  mingling  of  different  principles  of 
division  in  one  discourse  is  a  necessity.  You  can  not 
always  develop  a  subject  thoroughly  on  any  one  prin- 
ciple of  classifying  materials.  The  practical  aim  of  a 
sermon  may  demand  an  eclectic  division.  Such  eclecti- 
cism is  no  evil  when  its  necessity  is  obvious. 

(3)  The  needless  mingling  of  diverse  principles  of 
division  is  an  evil.  This  will  be  best  illustrated  by  an 
example.  The  following  plan  of  thought  was  once 
presented  in  this  lecture-room  for  criticism.  The  propo- 
sition is  "  The  character  of  St.  Paul."  The  divisions 
are:  1.  St.  Paul's  acuteness  as  a  reasoner;  2.  St. 
Paul's  depth  of  sensibility ;  3.  St.  Paul's  love  of  his 
country;  4.  St.  Paul's  fidelity  to  Christ;  6.  St.   Paul 


LBCT.  ixvra.]       THE  DIVISION :   MATERIALS.  397 

in  the  closing  scenes  of  his  life.  These  are  all  salient 
points,  in  which  the  individuality  of  the  Apostle's  char- 
acter is  seen.  Each  one  regarded  singly  is  interesting. 
Each  one  can  be  impressively  developed.  Yet  this  can 
not  be  pronounced  a  good  plan  of  the  subject.  Why  ? 
Because  of  the  needless  diversity  of  the  principles  of 
division.  They  are  no  less  than  five  in  number.  St. 
Paul's  intellectual  character,  his  emotive  nature,  fcis 
social  relations,  his  religious  experience,  the  chrono- 
logical order  of  his  biography,  —  these  five  distinct 
principles  are  suggested  in  the  plan,  and  each  one 
stands  alone.  They  give  distinct  patches  of  material 
cut  from  as  many  different  species  of  fabric.  What 
is  the  evil  of  such  combinations  of  material?  It  is 
twofold.  In  the  first  place  they  tend  to  deceive  the 
preacher.  Such  divisions  often  seem  distinct  in  form 
when  they  are  not  so  in  reality.  They  covertly  over- 
]ap ;  and  the  consequence  is  that  the  preacher  uncon- 
sciously repeats  himself.  You  can  not  make  the  three 
sections  of  a  cone,  and  yet  avoid  their  intersection 
somewhere.  This  is  the  difficulty  to  which  divisions 
founded  on  different  principles  of  analysis  are  always 
liable.  Further :  such  cross-divisions  tend  to  confuse 
the  hearer.  If  the  necessity  for  them  is  not  obvious, 
the  rhetorical  instinct  which  is  in  every  mind  will  in 
some  minds  murmur  its  sense  of  confusion,  however 
bold  the  distinctions  may  be  in  form  of  statement. 
Hei2  is  a  Gothic  window.  I  describe  \t  by  sajdng  that 
it  is  made  of  wood,  and  glass,  and  lead,  and  oak,  and 
paint.  I  add  that  some  of  its  panes  are  red,  and  some 
are  circular,  and  some  are  blue,  and  some  are  larger 
than  others,  and  that  some  are  square,  and  some  are 
green.  I  continue,  that  some  are  diamond-shaped,  and 
Bome  are  opaque,  and  some  are  '^rescent,  and  seme  are 


898  THE  THEORY  OF  PllEACHING.      [iect.  xxvm 

concave,  and  some  are  ground,  and  some  are  painted, 
and  some  are  yellow,  and  some  are  cracked,  and  some 
are  transparent,  and  some  are  patched,  and  some  are 
missing.  Taking  breath,  I  conclude  by  observing  that 
it  was  modeled  by  Michael  Angelo,  and  is  a  memorial 
window,  and  that  it  is  a  venerable  relic  of  Italian  art, 
and  that  it  still  exists  in  the  Church  of  Santa  Maria  in 
Florence,  with  a  picture  of  a  dove  in  the  center,  which 
has  lost  one  wing.  This  may  all  be  true.  But  is  it  a 
good  description  of  a  Gothic  window  ? 

5th,  A  fifth  principle  respecting  the  materials  of  di- 
visions is  that  they  should  be  susceptible  of  unity  of 
development.  We  have  remarked  of  the  proposition, 
that  it  should  be  such  that  unity  may  characterize  the 
discussion  as  a  whole.  The  same  principle  applies  to 
divisions.  Each  should  be  in  itself  a  unit,  and  suscep- 
tible of  compact  development. 

(1)  Therefore  a  division  should  not  comprise  mate- 
rials which  are  not  one  in  their  natural  impression. 
For  example,  it  is  often  unphilosophical  to  consider  the 
nature  and  the  cause  of  a  thing  under  one  division. 
The  nature  of  sin  and  the  cause  of  sin  invite  totally 
different  processes  of  research,  and  suggest  different 
materials  of  thought.  They  demand,  therefore,  sepa- 
rate divisions.  Again:  it  is  often  unphilosophical  to 
combine  explanation  and  proof  in  one  division,  unless 
the  onels  but  a  brief  preliminary  to  the  other.  To  ex- 
plain and  to  prove  on  equal  terms  in  the  same  division 
mvite  divided  attention.  To  explain  what  is  meant 
by  the  perseverance  of  the  saints  and  to  prove  the  fact 
of  the  perseverance  of  the  saints  are  processes  so  unlike, 
that  they  are  not  natural  ar^sociates  in  discussion.  Each 
must  concentrate  attention  upon  itself.  For  this,  each 
requires  a  separate  division      Still  less  philosophical  is 


jwrr.  xxvm.]       THE  DIVISION :    MATERIALS.  399 

it  to  discuss  the  conciliatory  and  the  comminatory  bear- 
ings of  a  truth  in  one  division.  Often  it  is  not  wise  to 
do  this  even  in  one  sermon.  It  is  not  natural  to  invite 
and  to  threaten  in  the  same  breath.  JMen  do  not  yield 
to  invitation  and  to  threats  at  the  same  moment.  It  is 
a  mark  of  an  ill-trained  mind  to  utter  both  in  volatile 
succession.  Colloquial  excitement  which  vents  itself 
in  both  excites  laughter. 

Further:  it  is  unphilosophical  to  apply  a  truth  to 
Christians  and  to  the  impenitent  in  the  same  division, 
unless  the  application  is  one.  Many  truths  are  appli- 
cable to  men  indiscriminately ;  but  many  others  are  not. 
The  Lord's  Supper  is  not  the  same  to  the  godly  and 
to  the  ungodly  alike.  Its  practical  bearing  upon  the 
two  classes  requires  separation  into  different  sections. 
Often  it  is  unphilosophical  to  present  argument  and 
appeal  in  the  same  division.  This  is  not  always  true. 
But  often  argument  may  be  abstract,  or  it  may  be  in- 
complete ;  and  in  either  case  the  mood  for  appeal  may 
not  have  been  created.  If  not  created  in  the  hearers, 
it  ought  not  to  exist  in  the  speaker.  The  unity  of  the 
division  is  sacrificed,  if  the  appeal  be  forced. 

You  will  perceive  from  these  illustrations,  that  the 
principle  involved  in  them  is  not  arbitrary  nor  trivial. 
It  is  grounded  in  the  nature  of  certain  processes  of 
mind  which  are  concerned  both  in  constructing  and  in 
receiving  a  communication  of  thought.  Certain  pro» 
cesses  can  not  naturally  be  intermingled.  Thoy  may 
succeed  each  other;  but  they  can  not  be  blended. 
This  is  only  aflBrming,  that,  in  constructing  a  sermon, 
a  preacher  should  attend  thoroughly  to  one  thing  at  a 
time.  Yet  you  will  often  detect  the  absence  of  this 
unity  as  the  secret  cause  of  the  self-contradiction  of  a 
division  in  your  struggle  to  develop  it.      The  defeat 


400  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING,      [lect.  xxvm 

lies  in  the  materials  of  the  division  itself.  Though  not 
self-contradictory  logically,  it  is  so  in  rhetorical  impres- 
sion. It  is  bifurcate.  You  have  two  grooves  to  follow 
at  once,  which  are  not  parallel. 

(2)  Yet  the  unity  of  a  division  may  admit  of  obvi- 
ous  distinction  of  materials.  All  that  unity  requires  is 
a  certain  sympathy  in  the  resiiltant  impressions.  This 
does  not  conflict  with  diversity  in  the  instruments  of 
impression.  For  instance,  unity  of  division  admits  the 
combination  of  mental  processes,  which,  though  dis- 
tinct, lie  in  one  line  of  thought.  Thus  a  division  may 
propose  to  illustrate  and  to  prove  a  truth.  Illustration 
and  proof  are  very  closely  allied  in  rhetorical  character 
They  assist  each  other.  To  a  certain  extent  they  in- 
terchange of&ces.  Proof  often  illustrates  a  truth,  and 
illustration  often  proves  a  truth.  As  mutual  allies, 
they  may  aim  at  one  result,  and  make  one  impression. 

In  like  manner,  unity  of  division  admits  the  state 
ment  of  qualities  of  a  thing,  which,  though  distinct, 
have  close  resemblance.  A  division  may  treat  of  the 
depth  and  the  breadth  of  a  principle.  You  are  to 
show  that  it  is  profound  in  its  nature,  and  far-reaching 
in  its  applications.  These  are  distinct  qualities,  yet  in 
unison.  Depth  and  breadth  are  both  measures  of  mag- 
nitude. The  impression,  therefore,  is  one.  No  mental 
strain  is  required  to  develop  it,  and  none  to  receive  it. 
On  the  same  principle,  unity  of  division  admits  the 
mention  of  graces  of  character,  which,  though  distinct, 
have  an  obvious  sympathy.  You  may  consider  in  the 
came  division  injuries  as  demanding  both  forbearance 
and  forgiveness.  These  graces  lie  in  the  same  line. 
Not  only  is  no  confusion  produced;  but  no  effort  is 
necessary,  if  we  consider  both  simultaneously. 

Furthermore,  unity  of  division  permits  the  discussion 


LECT.  xxvm.]       THE  DIVISION :   MATERIALS.  401 

of  duties  and  of  sins,  which,  though  distinct,  naturally 
accompany  each  other.  You  may  propose  to  treat  in 
the  same  paragraph  the  duties  of  godly  sorrow  and 
repentance,  or  the  sinfulness  of  falsehood  and  hypoc- 
Tisy,  The  duties  here  named  are  distinct  in  character, 
yet  never  separate  in  life.  The  sins  here  specified  aic 
net  synonymous,  yet  they  are  always  co-existent.  No 
violence,  therefore,  is  done  to  the  natural  connections, 
if  such  diversities  are  covered  by  one  division. 

Once  more,  unity  of  division  allows  even  the  combi- 
nationof  certain  opposites  of  material.  Opposites  are 
not  always  contradictories,  as  facts  are  not  always 
truths.  Some  opposites  in  thought  are  complements 
to  each  other.  Beneath  the  surface  a  hidden  current 
unites  and  intermingles  them.  One  of  the  early  preach- 
ers of  New  England  published  a  sermon  on  "  Flattery 
and  Slander."  A  keen  judgment  of  character  disclosed 
to  him  the  fact  that  these  two  sins,  though  seemingly 
at  antipodes,  are  one  in  sympathy.  They  are  the  fruit 
of  the  same  mental  vice,  and  are  very  apt  to  co-exist 
in  the  same  person.  The  flatterer  to  your  face  will 
probably  slander  you  behind  your  back.  These  oppo- 
sites, and  others  like  them,  might  be  properly  treated, 
not  only  in  one  discourse,  but  even  in  the  same  division 
of  a  discourse. 

These  illustrations  are  ample  to  show  that  unity  of 
division  admits  of  very  great  diversity  of  materials. 
It  demands  no  iron  rigidity  of  exclusion ;  but  is  duc- 
tile, rather,  to  the  utmost  extent  of  natural  combina- 
tions of  thought.  Specially  is  the  dual  division  often 
the  natuial  unit.  To  one  who  is  accustomed  to  minute 
criticism  of  discourse,  the  phenomenon  becomes  a  curios- 
ity from  the  frequency  of  its  occurrence,  —  that  things 
live  and  move  by  twos.     It  almost  seems  as  if  the 


402  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,      [lect.  xxvm 

double  structure  of  our  brains  created  duality  of 
thought.  The  peint  to  be  watched,  therefore,  in  ad- 
justing the  materials  of  divisions,  is  not  the  fact,  but 
the  degree,  of  diversity.  Any  degree  is  natural  which 
leave?  room  for  natural  oneness  of  impression.  All 
that  criticism  can  say  is  that  the  diversity  should  not 
be  such  as  to  impair  that  unity. 

6th,  The  sixth  principle  respecting  the  materials  of 
divisions  is  that  those  of  the  body  of  the  sermon  should 
not  anticipate  those  of  the  conclusion.  Here,  again, 
as  in  the  structure  of  the  introduction,  the  locality  of 
materials  is  a  prime  object  of  study.  The  "  where  "  is 
often  as  vita:  to  impression  as  the  "what."  Certain 
materials  in  every  discourse  naturally  belong  to  the 
conclusion.  To  anticipate  them  is  to  impair  their  force. 
It  is  like  reading  a  book  backwards. 

(1)  Obedience  to  th's  principle  is  often  essential  to 
the  logical  symmetry  of  a  discussion.  In  an  argumen- 
tative sermon,  for  instance,  the  development  of  the 
proposition,  and  the  applications  of  it,  are  totally  dis- 
tinct processes.  The  one  belongs,  in  the  nature  of  the 
case,  to  the  body  of  the  discourse,  and  the  others  be- 
long to  its  ending.  You  have  no  logical  right  to  apply 
a  truth  before  it  is  proved.  That  is  not  compact  argu- 
ment which  is  suspended  in  the  middle  to  give  place  to 
an  appeal.  The  divisions  of  the  body  of  the  discourse 
must  in  such  a  case  keep  to  the  necessities  of  logic. 

(2)  The  observance  of  the  principle  in  question  is 
often  necessary  to  rhetorical  force  when  not  essential 
to  the  symmetry  of  logic.  There  is  an  order  of  rhetori- 
cal force  which  can  no  more  be  violated  with  impunity 
than  the  laws  of  perspective  can  be  in  painting.  In  an 
illustrative  discourse,  for  exampb,  it  mp»y  be  that  no 
necessities  of  logic  locate  the  maerials  here  or  there; 


^ 


LEOT.  xxvm.]       THE  DIVISION :   MATERIALS.  403 

yet  they  may  be  weak  here,  and  powerful  there.  Lo- 
cality may  determine  every  thing  about  them  which  ia 
worth  determining.  The  point  of  culmination  in  the 
interest  of  a  sermon  may  turn  on  the  question  whether 
you  shairpresent  a  certain  illustration  early  in  the  dis- 
cussion, or  reserve  it  for  the  close.  Even  in  a  sermon 
made  up  mainly  of  exhortation,  the  succession  of  the 
materials  may  be  the  vital  feature  of  the  whole.  Which 
first  ?  which  last  ?  Hope,  love,  fear, — which  shall  begin, 
and  which  end,  the  appeal  ?  Rhetorical  force  depends 
specially  on  cumulative  impression.  Some  materials 
are  more  intense  than  others.  Those  of  the  body  of 
the  sermon  should  be  so  selected  and  adjusted  as  to 
leave  the  most  intense  for  the  conclusion. 

(3)  Preaching  is  exposed  to  peculiar  peril  of  prema- 
ture applications  of  truth.  No  other  themes  of  public 
discussion  are  so  prolific  of  practical  application  as  are 
those  of  the  pulpit.  No  others  have  such  intense  appli- 
cations. No  others  are  commonly  so  urgent  in  point  of 
time.  "Now,"  "now,"  is  the  applicatory  symbol  always 
present  to  a  preacher's  mind  in  the  flush  of  his  eager- 
ness to  reach  his  object.  Therefore  a  pressure  of  appli- 
catory thought  often  crowds  upon  the  process  of  dis- 
cussion. The  materials  for  an  appeal  accumulate  as 
the  discussion  advances.  The  impulse  is  to  give  way 
to  them.  At  a  felicitous  turn  of  thought  the  applica- 
tion comes  to  view  so  luminously  and  so  grandly,  that 
you  feel  impelled  to  use  it  then  and  there.  "  Now  or 
never  "  says  the  impulse  of  your  sensibility.  It  often 
requires  intellectual  self-denial  to  restrain  that  impulse. 

If  you  have  ever  ascended  Mount  Rhigi  or  IMount 
Washinglon  on  a  clear  day,  did  it  not  cost  you  an  effort 
to  refrain  from  a  first  look  at  the  scenery  below  you, 
till  you  reached  the  summit,  and  could  take  in  the 


1 


404  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING,      [lect.  xxvm 

whole  in  one  immense  panorama  ?  Side-looks  at  patches 
of  the  valley  were  tempting  you  all  the  way  up.  So  it 
is  often  with  homUetic  experience  in  the  handling  of 
intense  subjects.  We  are  tempted  to  frequent  pauses 
for  an  applicatory  use  of  our  materials  in  fragments. 
Hence  proceeds  that  structure  of  discourse  in  which 
the  conclusion  is  inferior  in  applicatory  power  to  cer 
tain  fragments  in  the  body  of  the  sermon.  The  first 
and  overwhelming  look  was  halfway  down  the  moun- 
tain. Nothing  subsequent  bears  comparison  with  that 
in  its  impression.  Hence,  also,  comes  that  structure  of 
discourse  in  which  the  applicatory  impression  is  dissi- 
pated before  the  conclusion  is  reached.  The  whole  bulk 
of  the  conclusion  proper  has  been  stolen  in  parcels,  a 
little  here,  and  a  little  there/  Bv  petty  distribution  of 
impression  all  impression  is  lost,  j  The  practical  impres- 
sion of  discourse  may  be  squandered  by  excessive  distri- 
bution. The  conclusion  can  only  repeat  what  it  might 
have  been,  if  the  preacher  had  practiced  reserve  and 
concentration. 

7th,  A  seventh  principle  is  that  the  materials  of  the 
conclusion  should  not  return  upon  the  foregoing  parts 
of  a  sermon,  except  by  way  of  intentional  recapitula- 
tion. 

(1)  The  divisions  of  a  conclusion  may  return  thus 
improperly  upon  previous  parts  of  the  sermon  by  the 
suggestion  of  new  materials  which  belong  to  those  pre- 
vious localities.  Qualifying  statements  which  should 
have  been  in  the  introduction ;  explanatory  remarks  ou 
the  text  which  should  have  preced'^d  the  announce- 
ment of  the  subject ;  new  proofs  of  the  proposition 
which  should  have  been  divisions  in  the  discussion,  — 
are  examples  to  the  point.  Rhetorically  they  are  like 
the  postscript  to  a  letter. 


LECT.  xxvin.]       THE  DIVISION :   MATERIALS.  405 

(2)  The  same  defect  may  arise  from  sheer  repetition 
of  material.  The  proposition  may  be  reproduced  in  the 
form  of  an  inference.  For  example,  the  proposition  is, 
"  The  stability  of  the  Christian  Church."  The  sermon 
illustrates  or  proves  this;  then  the  preacher  observes 
ui  conclusion,  "  1.  We  see  from  this  subject  that  the 
Church  of  Christ  can  never  be  destroyed."  Such  dis- 
courses recall  the  Irish  legend  of  St.  Patrick  going  on 
a  pilgrimage,  carrying  his  own  head  under  his  arm. 

8th,  An  eighth  principle  respecting  the  materials  of 
[ivisiohs  is  that  they  should  be  as  suggestive  as  possi 
ble  of  the  main  thoughts  of  the  proposition. 

(1)  No  single  quality  of  good  divisions  is  more 
valuable  than  this.  The  idea  of  it  is  that  the  materials 
of  each  division  should  be  so  related  to  the  proposition 
as  to  be  a  reminder  of  it.  The  two  should  be  connected 
by  a  something,  perhaps  an  indefinite  je  ne  sais  quot, 
like  the  indefinable  resemblance  which  we  often  detect 
between  parent  and  child. 

(2)  The  opposite  of  this  is  a  division  constructed  in 
abstract  form,  which  relies  on  its  development  to  make 
its  relation  to  the  proposition  obvious.  Have  you  not 
heard  sermons  which  set  you  upon  the  inquiries, 
"  What  was  the  subject  ?  what  was  the  text  ?  what  has 
this  division  to  do  with  either  ?  "  It  does  not  remind 
you  of  the  theme.  You  have  to  search  for  that,  and 
then  to  carry  it  by  the  dead-lift  of  memory.  The  cen- 
tral thought  of  the  discourse  is  mined  out  from  the 
depths  of  each  division  as  its  development  proceeds, 
instead  of  being  visible  on  its  surface;  while  usually, 
in  a  well-constructed  plan,  every  division  is  an  "out- 
crop "  of  the  proposition.  You  are  not  at  any  moment 
in  doubt  as  to  what  the  subject  is. 

(3)  Yet  this  incessant  reproduction  of  the  proposi 


406  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,      [leot.  xxvm> 

tion  in  the  divisions  can  not  be  achieved  by  forms 
alone.  The  thoughts  of  the  divisions  must  produce  the 
effect.  Things,  not  forms,  must  create  it.  Here,  as 
elsewhere,  that  style  only  is  good  which  springs  into 
being  at  the  command  of  thought.  But,  when  the  very 
substance  of  a  division  demands  the  form  which  em- 
bodies this  suggestion  of  the  proposition,  no  audience  is 
so  uncritical  as  not  to  feel  the  excellence.  It  lies  in 
the  instinct  of  good  hearing  to  catch  such  sympathy 
between  subject  and  division,  and  to  feel  the  tribute  of 
it  to  powerful  discourse./  When  you  approach  the 
monument  on  Bunker  Hill,  you  observe  that  the  very 
fence  which  incloses  the  grounds  is  made  to  act  as  a 
reminder,  one  might  almost  say  a  historian,  of  the  event 
commemorated  within,  j  It  is  massive  in  size ;  it  is 
made  of  cast-iron;  the  posts  are  images  of  cannons. 
At  a  glance,  you  interpret  them  in  a  double  sense. 
They  are  more  significant  than  hieroglyphs.  Similar  to 
that  is  the  effect  which  we  should  aim  to  create  by  the 
very  frame-work  of  a  sermon,  as  related  to  the  subject 
which  it  incloses. 

(4)  Yet  it  should  be  observed  that  this  quality  is 
a  matter  of  degrees.  Not  every  proposition  is  suscep- 
tible of  being  thus  represented  with  vividness  in  the 
structure  of  divisions.  The  best  materials  may  not 
admit  of  statements  which  shall  act  as  exact  mirrors  to 
the  proposition.  It  is  in  illustrative  sermons  chiefly 
that  we  find  the  most  striking  examples  of  this  excel- 
lence. But  all  sermons  admit  of  some  degree  of  it.  It 
lies  in  the  very  nature  of  good  divisions,  as  a  growth 
from  the  root  of  a  good  proposition.  If  it  is  not  pos- 
sible, either  the  proposition  or  the  division  is  to  be 
suspected  of  some  radical  defect. 

IV.  The  fourth  general  topic  in  the  discussion  of 
divisions  is  that  of  their  form  of  statement. 


fjDCT.  xxTm.]  THE  DIVISION 

Istj  All  these  principles  which  have  been  observed 
as  requisite  to  the  construction  of  the  forms  of  propo- 
sitions applj  as  well  to  the  forms  of  divisions.     The  j.^ 
practical  objects  aimed  at  are  three,  —  that  the  forms  | 
of  statement  be  intelligible  without  being  hackneyed,  I 
that  they  be  interesting  without  being  fanciful,  and  that 
they  be  easily  riemembered.     Divisions,  however,  have 
facilities  for  attaining  ttese  objects  which  propositions 
have  not,  and  they  are   exposed  to  defects  to  which 
propositions  are  not  so  liable.     I  offer,  therefore,  some 
additional  suggestions   on  this  topic   of  the  forms   of 
divisions. 

2d,  The  forms  of  divisions  should  be  adjusted  as 
forcibly  as  possible  to  the  design  of  the  proposition. 
A  division  may  be  assimilated  to  a  proposition,  not 
merely  by  its  materials,  but  also  by  its  verbal  structure. 
A  plan  of  a  sermon  was  once  delivered  here  for  criti- 
cism, of  which  the  proposition  was,  "  To  consider  the 
qualifications  requisite  to  a  public  profession  of  reli- 
gion." The  first  division  was,  "  The  Church  should  be 
composed  of  regenerate  men."  The  critic  suggested 
this  as  a  superior  form,  "  The  first  qualification  requi- 
site to  a  public  profession  of  religion  is  a  regenerate 
character."  "But,"  said  the  preacher,  "that  is  the 
same  thing."  —  "True,"  was  the  reply.  "I  did  not 
mean  to  interpolate  a  different  thing^  but  to  suggest  a 
different  form.  You  propose  to  discuss  qualifications : 
why  not  enumerate  qualifications?  Why  approach 
results  by  inference,  which  can  as  well  be  taken  in 
hand  by  direct  assertion?  Why  not  thus  make  you* 
division  a  direct  auxiliary  to  your  proposition  ?  " 

(1)  Yet  this  formal  assimilation  of  divisions  to  the 
proposition  is  of  no  value,  if  it  is  in  form  only.  Archi- 
tects tell  us  that  high  art  tolerates  no  painted  woods. 


V 


408  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHESTQ.      [lbct.  xxvm. 

So,  in  sermonizing,  we  want  no  fictions.  Bat  resem- 
blances in  fact  can  be  used  as  such  most  effectually 
through  resemblances  in  form. 

(2)  But  visible  resemblance  to  a  proposition  in  the 
form  of  a  division  is  not  always  practicable.  The  propo- 
sition may  not  invite  'such  forms  of  divisions.  It  may 
be  a  doctrine  to  be  proved  by  arguments,  the  natural 
statement  of  which  is  not  directly  suggestive  of  the 
doctrine.  Very  well:  do  not,  then,  force  the  resem- 
blance. The  oratorical  instinct  must  decide  when  this 
excellence  of  form  is  practicable.  All  that  criticism  can 
say  is.  Recognize  it  as  an  excellence,  and  use  it  when- 
ever it  is  a  natural  expression  of  the  sympathy  between 
proposition  and  division. 

3d,  Divisions  should  be  constructed,  if  possible,  so 
as  to  suggest  each  other.  When  they  can  not  resemble 
the  proposition,  they  may  often  resemble  each  other.  If 
similarity  of  thought  exists,  resemblance  in  form  may 
express  that  similarity.  Interrogative  divisions  may 
often  have  such  a  resemblance.  Such  divisions  very 
directly  suggest  each  other.  A  series  of  antithetic 
divisions  may  do  the  same.  Even  a  series  of  declara- 
tive divisions  may  so  resemble  each  other  in  brevity  as 
to  be  mutually  suggestive.  Said  one  preacher,  "Let 
us  consider  the  chief  elements  of  the  spirit  of  prayer. 
They  are :  1.  Desire ;  2.  Submission ;  3.  Trust ;  4.  Con- 
stancy." The  resemblance  here  in  brevity  of  expres- 
sion makes  these  divisions  expedients  of  suggestion  to 
each  other.  What  advantages  has  this  resemblance  in 
the  forms  of  divisions?  Chiefly  three.  The  resem- 
blance is  pleasing  in  itself  considered ;  it  assists  intelli- 
gent progress  through  a  discourse;  and  it  aids  the 
retention  of  a  discourse  in  the  memory.  The  Rev. 
William  Jay  was  so  studious  of  this  quality,  that  hia 


( 


U5CT.  xxvra.]  THE  DIVISION ;   FOEM.  409 

hearers  used  to  quote  entire  plans  of  his  sermons  many 
years  after  they  were  preached. 

It  should  be  observed,  however,  that  resemblances  in 
the  forms  of  divisions  are  not  worth  the  seeking  them 
by  the  use  of  fanciful  expedients.  Professor  Tholuck, 
in  one  of  his  "  University  Sermons,"  has  the  following 
series  of  divisions :  — 

**  1.  Die  Statte  seines  Scheidens, 
die  Statte  seines  Leidens : 

2.  Verhiillet  ist  sein  Anfang, 
verhiillet  ist  sein  Ausgang : 

3.  Der  Schluss  von  seinen  Wegen 
ist  f  iir  die  seinen  Segen : 

4.  Er  ist  von  irns  geschieden, 
xind  ist  uns  doch  geblieben : 

6.  Er  bleibt  verhiillet  den  Seinen 
bis  er  wird  klar  erscheinen." 

This  is  ingenious ;  but  it  is  ingenious  caricature.  The 
forced  antitheses  and  the  rhyme  are  both  out  of  keeping 
with  persuasive  discourse.  The  danger  always  attends 
the  cultivation  of  an  excellence  of  this  kind,  that  some 
minds  will  crowd  it  into  caricature. 

4th,  Divisions  should  be  so  constructed  that  they 
shall  not  be  easily  confounded  with  each  other. 

(1)  Resemblance  in  the  sound  of  certain  significant 
words  may  confound  divisions  which  are  really  dis- 
tinct. "  Conscience  "  and  "  consciousness  "  express  dif- 
ferent ideas.  But  two  contiguous  divisions,  in  which 
tbase  two  words  should  be  the  emphatic  words,  would 
almost  certainly  be  confounded  by  some  hearers. 
The  "humility"  of  Christ  and  the  "humiliation" 
of  Cluist  express  distinct  things;   yet  divisions  con- 


410  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.      [uBm'.  xxvm. 

structed  around  those  words  as  centers  wculd  inevi- 
tably be  fused,  and  would  run  together,  in  the  minds 
of  many  hearers. 

(2)  Distinct  divisions  may  be  confounded  by  the 
predominance  of  resemblance  over  difference  of  thought 
in  the  forms  of  statement.  The  sermons  of  the  Rev. 
Albert  Barnes  sometimes  illustrate  this  error.  His 
mind  was  marvelously  prolific  of  practical  reflections 
on  sacred  themes.  As  he  expanded  them,  they  would 
be  seen  to  be  distinct;  but  as  he  stated  them  they 
sometimes  appeared  to  be  repetitions.  His  "Notes," 
which  were  largely  sermons  in  their  original  form, 
exhibit  many  instances  to  the  point.  His  practical 
remarks  on  a  passage  are  usually  plans  of  sermons; 
and  in  some  cases  a  reader  finds  it  difficult  to  see  dis- 
tinctions in  the  absence  of  the  homiletic  developments 
which  made  them  plain.  He  composed  with  great 
rapidity;  and  his  divisions  were  sometimes  carelessly 
framed,  as  those  of  other  pastors  are  apt  to  be,  from 
the  same  cause.  Confusion  is  tolerated,  because  the 
development  removes  it.  Yet  the  superior  taste  would 
admit  no  confusion  to  be  removed. 

5th,  Divisions  should  be  so  constructed  as  to  be 
truthful  in  the  connections  in  which  they  stand.  A 
principle  may  in  itself  be  true ;  a  given  statement  of 
it  may  by  itself  be  true :  yet  in  the  connection  in 
which  it  stands  in  a  sermon  it  may  make  a  false 
impression.  Something  may  precede,  or  something  may 
be  omitted,  which  renders  the  statement  practically 
untrue.  Error  of  statement  may  thus  arise  from  mere 
position  of  statement. 


LECTURE    XXIX. 

T.HB  DIVISION:    FORM,   ORDER,   ANNOUNCEMENT. 

6th,  The  forms  of  divisions  again  demand  our  atten*         / 
tion  for  the   sake   of  a  sixth  principle;  namely,  that        ^ 
divisions  should  be  so  stated  as  to  foster  expectation  s^^ 
in  the  hearer. 

(1)  This  may  be  done  by  avoiding  needless  common- 
place in  the  forms  of  divisions.  The  common  stock  of 
thought  in  the  pulpit  has  modes  of  statement  which 
use  has  worn  out.  The  more  solemn  the  thought,  the 
more  threadbare  it  often  is  in  its  ancient  forms.  (^To 
change  the  figure,  the  utterance  of  such  a  thought  in 
such  a  form  is  an  opiate:  it  is  either  nauseating  or 
soporific./  Seek  fresh  expression  for  such  materials: 
revolve  them  in  mind  till  you  can  frame  less  hack- 
neyed statements  which  shall  still  be  natural  and  clear. 
You  thus  stimulate  attention  by  quickening  expecta- 
tion. "  The  value  of  the  soul "  was  in  our  Lord's  time 
no  novelty  to  human  thought.  To  the  Jewish  mind  it 
certainly  was  as  old  as  the  time  of  the  great  Law-giver, 
It  must  have  had  time-worn  forms  of  expression  inher- 
ited from  the  prophets.  It  was  our  Saviour's  mission 
to  give  it  a  new  life,  and  to  deepen  the  sense  of  its 
reality.  How  did  he  do  this  ?  He  achieved  it,  in  part, 
by  inventing  an  entirely  novel  way  of  putting  it  in 
familiar  discourse :  "  What  shall  a  man  give  in  exchange 

411 


412  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [lbct. 

for  his  soul?"  That  man  possesses  in  his  spiritual 
nature  a  treasure  distinct  from  all  others,  which  he 
subjects  to  barter  for  material  joys,  has  been  the  theme 
of  thousands  of  Christian  sermons;  but  that  way  of 
putting  the  case  was,  so  far  as  we  know,  original  with 
the  mind  of  Christ.  We  do  not  know  that  preacher, 
or  prophet,  or  poet,  or  philosopher,  ever  invented  that 
contrast  of  thought  before  he  gave  it. 

How  many  such  resurrections  of  old  and  dormant 
and  dying  thoughts  our  Saviour  accomplished  by  his 
spiritual  inventiveness,  who  can  say?  Yet  this  was 
no  inimitable  virtue  in  his  preaching.  A  preacher  has 
only  to  put  his  thought  to  himself  in  such  a  way  that 
it  touches  him  to  the  quick,  and  he  can  not  help  put- 
ting it  to  hearers  in  some  form  the  piquancy  of  which 
gives  it  the  force  of  an  original.  Grasp  the  handle  of 
an  electric  battery  fully  charged,  and  the  bystanders 
will  know  what  you  find  there  as  soon  as  you  do.  So, 
penetrate  any  theme  of  discourse  profoundly  enough  to 
be  yourself  electrified  by  it,  and  the  electric  expression 
of  it  to  others  comes  with  the  electric  thrill  in  you. 

(2)  Expectation  may  be  fostered  by  the  concealment 
of  the  conclusion  in  the  forms  of  divisions.  Never  hint, 
before  the  time,  whether  you  intend  to  appeal  to  a 
hearer's  judgment  in  the  conclusion,  or  to  his  sensibili- 
ties. By  all  natural  arts  keep  the  conclusion  secret, 
Emerson  writes,  "  Beware  of  the  man  who  sai/s  '  I  am 
on  the  eve  of  a  revelation.' "  Hearers  always  suspect 
a  speaker  who  foretells  much  of  what  he  is  going  to  do. 
The  doing  of  it  they  welcome  in  the  time  of  it ;  but  the 
promise  to  do  they  elude.  One  of  the  evils  of  announ- 
cing a  synopsis  of  the  sermon  at  the  beginning  is  that 
it  foretells  too  much.  It  hints  at  conclusions,  often 
reveals  them  outright.     Expectation  is  cloyed.     It  ia 


J 


LECr.  xxix.]  THE  DIVISION :    FORM.  418 

unfortuDate  when  a  preacher  says,  in  announcing  the 
last  division  of  a  sermon,  "  Before  proceeding  to  apply 
this  subject,  let  ns  remark,"  etc.  Why  hint  that  the 
subject  is  to  be  applied  ?  A  wiser  expedient,  often,  is 
to  have  no  application,  in  order  to  break  up  the  monot- 
ony in  the  hearer's  mind  of  the  inevitable  appeal.  At 
the  least,  we  should  not  remind  him  of  that  of  which 
the  chief  peril  is  that  he  will  foreknow  it,  end  therefore 
will  be  forewarned  against  it.  (Suspense  respecting  the 
conclusion  is  not  painful  to  a  hearer.  If  the  subject 
interests  him,  the  suspense  intensifies  the  interest. 

(3)  Expectation  may  be  fostered  by  the  negative 
method  of  discussion.  A  series  of  divisions  shows  that 
the  truth  is  not  this,  is  not  that,  is  not  the  other.  What 
is  the  rhetorical  effect  of  this  method  ?  It  is  to  excite 
curiosity  to  know  what  the  truth  is.  A  coming  negative 
first  suggests  that  the  affirmative  is  to  follow. 

(4)  Expectation  may  be  cherished  by  the  interroga- 
tive forms  of  division.  A  question  is  a  prospective 
statement  of  a  thought ;  it  gives  promise  of  an  unknown 
answer :  it  is  the  forerunner  of  an  invisible  guest.  To 
every  alert  mind  it  is  welcome.  Sometimes,  therefore, 
an  entire  series  of  divisions  thrown  into  the  form  of 
interrogatives  will  be  a  succession  of  stimulants  to  the 
expectant  mood.  Interrogative  statements  of  emphati(i 
truths  are  a  striking  feature  in  our  Saviour's  preaching. 
Socrates  by  his  example  has  given  it  a  name.  Such 
interrogati  res  draw  a  hearer  into  a  discussion  by  the 
sheer  attraction  of  curiosity  to  see  what  is  to  come  next. 

(5)  Expectation  is  stimulated  by  a  certain  indefinite- 
uess  of  form  in  the  statement  of  divisions.  English 
style  has  an  idiom,  of  which  I  have  just  given  an  exam- 
ple unconsciously.  I  spoke  of  "  a  certain  indefinitenesa 
of  form."    This  idiom  is  designed  to  express  two  things, 


414  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [lect.  xxn 

—  certainty  of  thought,  with  indefiniteness  of  expression. 
A  something  is  hinted  at  as  existing  in  the  mind  of  the 
speaker,  and  well  known  to  him  ;  but  the  full  expression 
of  it  is  held  in  reserve.  In  the  use  of  this  idiom  we 
mean  both  to  define  and  to  reserve  our  thought.  We 
give  a  glimpse  of  it,  and  promise  more.  The  form  of 
statement  i^  suggestive  :  it  is  a  tacit  prediction  of  more 
than  it  expresses.  This  form  of  statement  is  admissible 
in  the  divisions  of  sermons.  Instead  of  disclosing  the 
entire  outline  of  the  thing  which  you  are  about  to 
develop,  you  hint  at  it  as  "a  certain  thing,"  —  certain  to 
you  the  speaker,  not  yet  disclosed  to  the  hearer.  If 
this  seems  to  be  a  refinement  of  speculative  criticism, 
I  reply  that  it  is  such  only  in  the  seeming.  The  ora- 
torical instinct  frequently  resorts  to  it  in  practice,  with- 
out consciousness  of  doing  so.  The  secret  charm  which 
invites  that  oratorical  instinct  to  it  is  the  stimulus  which 
it  applies  to  the  mood  of  expectation. 

7th,  A  seventh  principle  is  that  in  different  discourses 
divisions  should  be  constructed  with  diversity  of  form. 
The  best  forms  become  hackneyed  by  use.  Genius  it- 
self would  become  the  synonym  of  dullness  if  it  worked 
a  treadmill.  An  intelligent  lady  writes  to  me  as  follows 
of  her  young  pastor  who  has  just  been  dismissed :  "  He 
was  a  kind  of  machine.  Clay  went  in  on  one  side, 
and  bricks  ready-made  came  out  on  the  other.  Every 
Sunday  he  brought  us  a  fresh  brick.  It  was  impossible 
not  to  love  him  for  his  finely-disciplined  mind,  and  his 
handsome  face,  and  his  tender,  spiritual  tone;  but  his 
sermons  were — dreadful !  '  Oh ! '  I  thought, '  if  he  wo  tdd 
but  have  had  a  brick  one-sided,  or  too  big,  or  too  little, 
cr  slack-baked,  or  burnt,  or  imprinted  with  his  own 
fingers,  what  a  joy  it  would  be ! '  There  was  a  relief 
when  the  next  minister  came,  and  gave  us  chips  ar<f 
sawdust." 


LBCT.  XXIX.]  THE  DIVISION :    ORDER.  416 

What  was  the  trouble  with  this  handsome  pastor? 
It  may  have  been  a  want  of  fertility  of  mind ;  but 
probably  not,  for  he  was  a  diligent  student.  The  desidr^ 
eratum  in  his  sermons  was  more  likely  to  be  a  variety, 
not  in  their  materials,  but  in  theirjcqnstruction.^" Ser- 
mons are  not  bricks :  they  should  not  be  made  in  one 
mould,  and  piled  one  on  another  with  trowel  and  plumb- 
line.  The  intrinsic  demands  of  thought,  if  obeyed, 
necessitate  variety.  Truth  puts  a  premium  on  variety, 
because  in  no  other  way  can  she  obtain  self-expression.^.,.,— ^ 

V.  The  fifth  general  topic  in  the  treatment  of  divis-  \f  ^  ' 
ions  is  that  of  their  order.  What  is  the  natural  order 
of  thought  ?  If  we  take  into  consideration  the  subject, 
its  discussion,  its  aim,  its  relation  to  the  hearers,  it  is 
obvious  that  the  natural  order  of  thought  must  be 
variable.  Much  must  be  left  to  the  homiletic  instinct 
in  the  selection.  The  most  that  criticism  can  do  is  to 
point  out  the  chief  varieties  of  order  by  which  divis- 
ions may  be  arranged.  Each  will  be  seen  to  involve  a 
distinct  principle  of  arrangement. 

1st,  Divisions  may  be  arranged  by  an  order  of  logical 
necessity.  Some  materials  of  discussion  must  from 
their  very  nature  precede  other  materials.  Some 
thoughts  have  no  logical  force  till  others  have  prepared 
the  way  for  them.  Some  divisions,  therefore,  are 
founded  upon  other  divisions;  and  the  foundations 
must  be  first  constructed.  If  you  discuss  in  the  same 
sermon  the  nature  of  a  doctrine  and  the  proof  of  that 
doctrine,  the  divisions  explanatory  of  its  nature  must 
precede  those  advanced  in  evidence.  You  can  not  natu- 
rally prove  a  thing  till  you  know  and  have  afl&rmed 
what  the  thing  is.  In  such  cat^es  the  order  of  dis 
course  is  evidently  imperative.  We  can  not  depart 
from  it :  we  can  not  vary  it :  we  can  scarcely  mistake  it 


y^' 


*# 


416  THE  THEOUY  OF  PREACHING.        fLKCr.  xxa 

Oratorical  instinct  adopts  it  almost  involuntarily.     It  w 
the  order  of  logical  necessity. 

2d,  Divisions  may  be  arranged  in  an  order  founded 
on  the  relation  between  cause  and  effect.  You  propose 
to  discuss  the  causes  and  the  consequences  of  a  moral 
phenomenon  in  the  same  sermon.  Which  shall  take 
precedence  in  the  order  of  discourse?  The  order  of 
creation  is  not  necessarily  the  natural  order  of  discus- 
sion. It  may  be  best  to  advance  from  effect  to  cause. 
Divine  providence  reasons  with  men  mainly  by  that 
order.  No  rule,  therefore,  can  be  given,  as  between 
cause  and  effect,  determining  which  shall  take  the  pre- 
cedence. We  can  only  recognize  the  principle  of  order 
as  founded  on  the  relation  between  these  two  things, 
and  recognize,  also,  that  the  order  ^'s  reversible. 

3d,  Divisions  may  be  arranged  in  an  order  founded 
on  the  relation  between  genus  and  species.  This,  again, 
is  a  specimen  of  a  reversible  order.  Not  invariably  must 
the  genus  be  first  considered.  The  order  of  discovery 
is  generally  from  species  to  genus.  So  may  be  that  of 
popular  discourse.  Cumulative  impression  may  demand 
this  order,  yet  a  different  purpose  might  require  the 
reverse  order.  Criticism  can  only  recognize  the  order 
and  its  reversibility. 

4th,  Divisions  may  be  arranged  in  the  order  of  in- 
trinsic dignity.  Oratorical  instinct  outruns  criticism 
in  approving  the  value  of  (if  I  may  coin  a  mucli 
Qeeded  word)  a  climactic  procession  of  thought.  In 
tuitively  in  discourse  we  begin  with  the  less,  and 
end  with  the  greater.  Power  of  impression  depends 
largely  on  rise  of  impression.  What  possible  sense 
of  order  in  thought  could  have  directed  Neal,  in 
his  history  of  the  Puritans,  when  he  described  Ber- 
nard Gilpin  in  the  following  language?  —  "He  was  a 


LECT.  XXIX.]  THE  DIVISION :    ORDER.  417 

heavenly-minded  man,  of  a  large  and  generous  soul,  of 
a  tall  stature  of  body,  with  a  Roman  nose,  and  his 
clothes  were  neat."  Could  the  historian  more  perfectly 
have  justified  De  Quincey's  famous  caricature  of  cli- 
max ?  —  "  If  a  man  indulges  himself  in  murder,  he  verj 
soon  comes  to  think  little  of  robberv  and  from  robbing 
he  comes  to  drinking,  and  from  that  to  incivility  and 
procrastination." 

Sometimes,  however,  it  is  an  open  question  which  cf 
two  divisions  is  the  superior.  In  the  defense  of  Profes- 
sor Webster,  his  counsel  adopted  as  nearly  as  possible 
the  same  order  that  Cicero  did  in  the  defense  of  Milo. 
Whether  consciously  or  not,  I  do  not  know;  but  the 
imitation  was  remarkable.  He  argued :  1.  That  Pro- 
fessor Webster  did  not  kill  Dr.  Parkman ;  2.  That,  if 
he  did,  he  committed  justifiable  homicide.  Then,  after 
a  recess,  he  returned  to  the  point  first  discussed,  —  the 
denial  of  the  deed.  Members  of  the  bar  in  Boston 
were  divided  in  opinion  as  to  the  wisdom  of  this  order. 
Some  contended  that  it  indicated  a  wavering  of  convic- 
tion on  the  part  of  the  counsel ;  that  the  division  claim- 
ing that  he  did  not  commit  the  deed  should  have  been 
reserved  wholly  for  the  close  of  the  discussion.  A  very 
grave  question,  in  that  case,  depended  on  the  order  of 
the  argument.  So,  in  preaching,  the  force  of  a  sermon 
may  demand  a  delicate  discrimination  in  determining 
what  is  the  order  of  dignity.  In  intrinsic  dignity  that 
truth  is  the  most  weighty  which  will  carry  the  most 
weight  over  to  the  object  of  discourse. 

6th,  Divisions  may  be  arranged  in  an  order  suggested  -  a    -p 
by  psychological  analysis.     A  large  class  of  the  mate-    '  ^' 
rials  of  the  pulpit  group  themselves  around  the  faculties 
given  by  the  analysis  of  the  mind.     For  instance,  we 
should  naturally  argue  man's  duty:  1.   To   acquaint 


^^ 


418  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [lkct.  xxix. 

himself  with  the  Scriptures;  2.  To  yield  his  heart  to 
their  control;  3.  To  obey  their  precepts  in  his  life. 
"  Psychological "  is  a  profound  word  to  apply  to  these 
divisions.  No  hearer  will  think  of  them  as  such;  no 
wise  preacher  will  call  them  such  in  the  pulpit;  but 
thsy  are  such.  Intellect,  feeling,  and  will  lie  at  the 
basis  of  the  division.  The  oratorical  instinct  often 
adopts  this  order  in  the  pulpit,  even  when  unconscious 
of  any  metaphysical  design.  This  is  also  one  of  the 
r3versible  orders.  We  can  not  always  preach  in  the 
psychological  groove,  beginning  with  the  intellect,  and 
ending  with  the  will.  The  opposite  order  may  be 
necessary  to  the  purpose  of  the  sermon.  All  that 
criticism  can  say,  therefore,  is  that  this  is  an  order 
founded  on  the  psychological  analysis.  From  which  end 
the  order  shall  proceed  must  depend  on  the  aim  of  the 
discourse,  and  will  commonly  be  decided,  not  by  a 
deliberate,  but  by  a  spontaneous,  decision  of  the  rhe- 
torical instinct. 

6th,  Divisions  may  be  arranged  in  an  order  of  time. 
Events  in  historical  order,  biography  in  chronological 
order,  hypotheses  in  the  order  of  probable  occurrence 
are  illustrations  of  this.  Experience  as  actually  lived 
lies  at  the  foundation  of  a  multitude  of  sermons. 

7th,  Divisions  may  be  arranged  in  an  order  founded 
on  weight  of  argument.  This  will  commonly  coincide 
with  the  order  of  intrinsic  dignity.  Like  that,  the  order 
of  argument  should  be  climactic,  —  the  weakest  argu* 
ment  first,  the  unanswerable  argument  last.  Positive 
argument  naturally  follows  negative  argument.  Proba- 
ble argument  follows  presumptive  argument.  Con- 
clusive argument  follows  proximate  argument.  If  an 
argument  is  relatively  weak,  be  it  so;  let  it  be  seen 
to  be  80 ;  call  it  so,  if  you  please.    More  is  gained  by 


LECT.  XXIX.]  THE  DIVISION :    ORDER.  419 

candor  than  by  logical  legerdemain.  Inform  an  audi«- 
ence  just  how  much  an  argument  is  worth,  just  how 
far  it  carries  you  towards  your  conclusion,  and  claim 
no  more  for  it;  and  you  command  their  assent  both 
to  your  logic  and  to  your  candor.  One  argument,  if 
trae,  is  as  good  as  another,  so  far  as  it  goes.  Weight 
is  weight.  The  small  weight,  if  gained  honestly,  is  aa 
respectable  as  a  large  one. 

"  I  want  good  solid  arguments  at  first  sight,"  says 
Montaigne.  Very  true  ;  and  the  pulpit  should  use  no 
other  than  good  arguments  and  solid.  But  if,  of  solid 
arguments,  one  is  less  weighty  than  another,  why 
should  we  cheat  in  the  weight  by  concealing  the  in- 
feriority? Let  it  stand  at  the  beginning:  claim  for 
it  only  what  it  is :  let  it  seem  to  be  what  presumption 
is  to  demonstration.     So  decides  intuitive  logic. 

8th,  Divisions  may  be  arranged  in  an  order  depend- 
ent on  progress  in  the  personal  interest  of  hearers. 
One  of  the  chief  aims  of  preaching  is  to  individualize 
hearers,  and  to  bring  truth  home  to  each  man's  per- 
sonality. Hence  the  order  perhaps  most  frequently 
adopted  by  a  keen  homiletic  instinct  is  that  of  progress 
in  stimulating  individual  interest. 

The  following  plan  of  discourse,  once  presented  in 
this  place,  will  illustrate  this.  Upon  the  subject  of 
"  The  claims  of  foreign  missions  upon  the  Church,"  the 
divisions  are  as  follows.  Foreign  missions  are  essential : 
1.  To  the  fulfillment  of  the  purposes  of  God ;  2.  To  the 
salvation  of  the  heathen  world;  3.  To  the  development 
of  the  Church  in  Christian  lands  ;  4.  To  certain  special 
benefits  to  the  churches  of  our  own  land ;  5.  To  symme- 
try of  religious  growth  in  every  Christian  soul.  In  this 
order  the  advance  is  from  the  remote  to  the  near,  from 
the  truth  of  infinite  range  to  the  truth  of  present  con 


420  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [lbct.  xxix. 

sciousness.  The  thought  moves  like  a  ball  in  a  spiral 
groove,  which  conducts  it  by  narrowing  circuits  to  a 
point  at  the  center. 

Such  are  the  most  important  varieties  of  order  id 
the  arrangement  of  divisions.  They  suggest  three  addi- 
tional remarks. 

(1)  Varieties  of  order  will  sometimes  coincide. 
Two  or  more  may  be  applicable  to  the  same  materials 
of  discourse. 

(2)  Varieties  of  order  will  frequently  conflict  with 
each  other.  The  aim  of  one  may  defeat  the  aim  of 
another.  The  order  of  time  may  be  the  reverse  of 
that  of  progressive  individual  interest.  The  order 
of  psychological  analysis  is  often  reversed  by  the  order 
of  experience.  The  following  plan  will  illustrate  this. 
From  the  proposition,  "The  effects  of  sin  on  the 
human  soul,"  the  divisions  are,  the  effects  of  sin: 
1.  On  the  human  intellect ;  2.  On  the  human  affection ; 
3.  On  the  human  will.  Such  was  a  plan  once  offered 
here  for  criticism.  In  the  light  of  mental  science  it 
seemed  philosophical.  It  was  complete  and  symmet- 
rical. What  was  the  defect  ?  The  critic  claimed,  and 
justly,  that  the  case  was  one  in  which  the  order  of 
experience  in  time  superseded  all  other  principles  of 
arrangement.  In  actual  experience  sin  does  not  com- 
mence its  ravages  in  the  intellect.  No  sin  exists  till 
the  will  is  corrupted.  The  order  of  the  sermon,  there- 
fore, the  materials  remaining  unchanged,  should  have 
been  reversed.  A  more  powerful  impression  may  be 
produced  by  following  the  line  of  experience,  and 
showing,  first,  that  the  will  is  perverted,  and  for  good 
uses  debilitated ;  then,  that  the  sensibilities  are  cor- 
rupted, and  for  holy  objects  deadened ;  and  finally,  that 
the  poison  of  sin  is  so  virulent,  that  even  the  intellect 


LKCT.  xxix.J    THE  DIVISION :    ANNOUNCEMENT.  421 

becomes  degenerated,  and  for  its  loftiest  purposes 
blinded.  Thus  moral  perception  is  distorted,  opinions 
are  refracted  from  pure  truth;  then  the  entire  moral 
being  deteriorates  under  the  infection,  and  integrity 
of  belief  ceases. 

(3)  Various  as  the  several  orders  of  division  are, 
the  object  aimed  at  in  them  is  always  the  same.  It 
is  progress  in  intensity  of  moral  impression.  The  order 
which  best  promotes  this  is  in  any  given  case  the  super- 
lative order.  Follow  that  order,  and  you  can  not  go 
wrong.  End  with  that  for  which  the  hearer's  need  of 
the  discourse  is  the  most  imperative.  Final  impres 
sions  should  be  intrinsically  and  relatively  the  most 
vital  of  all  impressions. 

VI.  The  last  general  topic  to  be  considered  is  that 
of  the  mode  of  announcing  divisions.  This  concerns 
chiefly  two  things,  the  use  of  numerical  announcements, 
and  the  use  of  other  prefatory  words.  By  either  method 
the  chief  objects  of  the  announcement  are  three,  —  in- 
telligibility, congruity  with  the  feelings  of  the  hearer, 
and  permanence  in  the  memory  of  the  hearer.  With 
these  objects  in  view  we  readily  see  the  propriety  of 
certain  principles  which  are  flexible  in  their  application. 

1st,  Divisions  should  be  so  announced  that  transi- 
tion shall  be   distinctly  perceptible.     Must  numerical 
forms,  then,  always  be  used?     Certainly  not.     Transi- 
tion can  often  be  made   distinct  by  the   use   of  such   '\ 
prefatory   words   as   "again,"  "further,"  "moreover,"     \ 
"once  more,"  "finally."     The  object  is  to  call  atten-     \ 
tion   to   the  fact   of  transition.     Whatever  does   that 
announces  a  division  sufficiently.   May  numerical  forms, 
then,  always  be  omitted  ?    Certainly  not.    Some  discus- 
sions require  them.     Transitions  must  often  be  empha- 
sized in  order  to  be  observed.     CoUoquial  u&age  em* 


422  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [lf.ct.  xxix 

ploys  the  numerical  forms  fieely.  The  common  people, 
expressing  serious  thought,  or  offering  arguments,  in- 
stinctively resort  to  numbers.  Sometimes  they  wiL 
assist  the  numerical  announcements  by  count  upon 
the  fingers.  To  illiterate  hearers,  the  numerals  are 
of  special  value  in  quickening  attention  to  the  fact  of 
transition,  and  in  assisting  them  to  follow  discourse 
more  elaborate  than  any  which  they  could  originate. 

2d,  Divisions  should  be  So  announced  as  to  preserve 
congruity  with  the  nature  of  the  materials.  "  In  the 
third  place  I  exhort  you ;  "  "  In  the  fifth  place  I  entreat 
you : "  what  is  the  cause  of  rhetorical  friction  here  ? 
It  is  a  want  of  congruity  between  emotive  materials 
and  the  severest  of  logical  forms.  Numerals  are 
adapted  to  explanatory  and  argumentative  divisions. 
They  are  germane  to  intricate  trains  of  thought.  ¥ot 
hortatory,  and  often  for  illustrative  materials,  the  less 
formal  preface  is  sufficient,  and  therefore  the  more  be- 
coming. 

3d,  Divisions  should  be  so  announced  as  not  to  be 
confounded  with  each  other.  General  divisions  and 
subdivisions  are  often  thus  confounded.  If  both  are 
introduced  numerically,  it  is  difficult  in  oral  address  to 
avoid  confusion.  A  good  general  rule,  therefore,  is 
to  number  your  general  divisions  only,  and  announce 
your  subdivisions  by  the  less  formal  method.  Usually 
this  will  be  congruous  with  the  nature  of  your  mate- 
r  als. 

4th,  Divisions  should  not  be  needlessly  announced 
by  a  preliminary  synopsis  at  the  beginning  of  the  dis- 
cussion. We  have  already  noticed  this  as  often  a 
needless  form  of  the  proposition.  But  frequently  it  is 
a  more  needless  appendage  to  the  proposition.  The  sub- 
ject is  formally  announced,  and  then  the  entire  outline 


LKJT.  rxix.]    THE  DIVISION :   ANNOUNCEMENT.  423 

of  the  discussion  is  proclaimed.  In  very  rare  cases  this 
may  be  a  necessity.  It  marks  the  extreme  of  all  possi- 
ble form :  it  ought  to  indicate  the  extreme  of  difficulty 
in  following  the  line  of  thought.  Otherwise  it  is  a 
dead  weight  of  form  which  the  hearer's  memory  must 
b'ft  and  carry.  De  Quincey,  speaking  of  a  peculiarity 
of  Paganism,  says,  "  Under  this  original  peculiarity  of 
Paganism  there  arose  two  consequences,  which  I  shall 
mark  by  the  Greek  letters  a  and  ^.  The  latter  I 
shall  notice  in  their  order,  first  calling  attention  to  the 
consequence  marked  a,  which  is  this,  etc."  You  feel 
at  once  that  ease  is  here  sacrificed  to  form,  and  need- 
lessly. The  artist  is  obtruding  upon  us  the  tools  of 
his  workshop.  Yet  the  forms  of  the  pulpit  are  some- 
times as  excessive  and  superfluous.  We  have  few  such 
preachers  as  Dr.  Emmons,  and  still  fewer  such  audi- 
ences as  that  of  the  old  church  in  Franklin  fifty  years 
ago.  Yet  even  in  Emmons's  works  I  am  unable  to  find 
more  than  two  or  three  sermons  in  which  this  ^pre- 
announcement  of  the  divisions  is  demanded  by  the 
character  of  the  materials. 

6th,  Divisions  should  be  so  announced  as  not  to  dis-  K 
close  prematurely  the  character  of  the  conclusion.  A  / 
conclusion  may  be  foretold,  not  only  by  the  substance  of 
the  divisions,  not  only  by  their  form,  but  also  by  their 
prefatory  announcements.  The  Rev.  Albert  Barnes 
has  a  discourse,  the  five  divisions  of  which  are  all 
pre-announced ;  and  then  is  interpolated  this  declara- 
tion :  "  The  first  three  of  these  topics  I  shall  treat  by 
way  of  illustration,  and  the  last  two  in  the  way  of 
inference  and  remark."  In  this  declaration  the  preacher 
soliloquizes.  He  thus  maps  out  the  discussion  for  liis 
own  convenience.  The  discussion  contains  nothing 
firhich  needs  any  such  forewarnirg  for  the  use  of  th€ 


424  THE  THEORY  OF  PKEACHING.       ilkci.  mx 

hearers.  The  disclosure  of  the  conclusion  especially 
is  premature.  Whatever  else  must  be  foretold,  the 
character  of  the  application  should  never  be  revealed 
till  the  moment  of  its  instant  use. 

6th,  Divisions  should  be  so  announced  as  not  to  de 
ceive  an  audience  respecting  the  destined  length  of  the 
discourse.  Never  express  or  hint  at  false  promises  of 
brevity.  Do  not  announce  "  a  brief  notice  "  of  a  divis- 
ion which  drags  itself  out  voluminously.  Do  not  prom- 
ise "  only  to  hint  at "  a  thought  which  you  proceed  to 
exhaust.  Do  not  ask  leave  "  to  add  a  word  or  two  " 
which  swell  into  a  harangue.  Do  not  declare  that  you 
will  state  an  inference  "without  remark,"  and  then 
add  an  appeal.  Then,  having  done  all  these  things,  do 
not  apologize  for  the  feebleness  of  your  discussion  on 
the  ground  of  "  want  of  time." 

A  preacher  is  under  obligations  of  honor  to  his  audi- 
ence in  this  thing.  He  is  master  of  the  field.  His 
hearers  are  helpless  under  the  imposition  of  his  flux 
of  words,  through  which  they  peer  in  vain  for  the  end. 
They  can  not  rise  and  rebuke  him  for  his  prolixity.  A 
boy  crunching  peanuts  in  Faneuil  Hall  has  more  liberty 
to  silence  a  political  speaker  on  the  platform  than  a 
judge  of  the  Supreme  Court  has  in  a  church  to  silence 
a  driveling  preacher.  Such  breaches  of  good  faith  are 
often  committed  in  the  use  of  the  prefatory  words  of 
concluding  divisions.  A  preacher  says  "lastly,"  and 
"finally,"  and  "once  more,"  and  "yet  one  thought, 
and  I  have  done."  Two,  three,  even  four  such  consola- 
tory glimpses  of  the  end  I  have  known  to  be  given  in 
succession ;  and  once  three  such  harbingers  of  rest 
were  followed  by  a  promise,  which  shrewd  hearers  were 
by  that  time  too  impatient  to  believe,  that  the  subject 
should  "  be  brought  to  a  close  by  a,  few  remarks."     "  Fi- 


LBCT.  XXIX.]    THE  DIVISION :   ANNOtJKCEMENT  425 

nally  "  is  a  very  precious  word  to  an  audience.  Hear- 
ers often  watch  for  it  as  they  that  watch  for  the 
morning.  Sometimes  the  more  thrilling  the  sermon, 
the  more  welcome  is  its  close.  There  is  a  weariness 
of  excitement  as  well  as  of  ennui.  The  most  popular 
quality  of  preaching  is  brevity.  If  a  sermon  does  not 
possess  it,  do  not  exasperate  an  audience  by  promis- 
ing it. 

In  closing  this  discussion  of  divisions,  let  me  express  j 
the  conviction  that  strength  in  preaching  depends  on  I 
no  other  rhetorical  excellence  so  much  as  on  good 
divisions  and  propositions ;  that  is,  on  good  planning 
of  thought.  Cultivate  the  faculty  of  strong,  compact 
finished  planning.  Study  critically  the  plans  of  your 
own  discourses.  Rewrite  your  best  sermons  rather 
than  your  poorest,  if,  by  so  doing,  you  can  improve  the 
substance,  or  the  forms,  or  the  order  of  their  outline. 
A  skeleton  is  not  a  thing  of  beauty ;  but  it  is  the  thing 
which,  more  than  any  other,  makes  a  body  erect  and 
strong  and  swift.  John  Quincy  Adams  says  that  "  di- 
visions belong  to  the  art  of  thinking."  They  are 
fundamental,  then,  to  the  art  of  uttering  thought.  To 
the  same  purpose  is  the  old  Roman  proverb,  Qui  hefu 
distinguit^  bene  doceL 


l\ 


y 


LECTURE   XXX. 

THE  DBVELOPAIENT :   DEFINITION,   PBEEBQUISITB8, 
CHABACTERISTICS. 

We  have  now  considered,  with  one  exception,  all 
those  parts  of  a  sermon  which  properly  belong  to  its 
frame-work.  The  theme  next  in  order  is  that  which 
has  been  denominated  the  development. 

I.  In  the  criticism  of  a  sermon  the  term  "  develop- 
ment "  may  be  used  to  designate  one  or  more  of  the  fol- 
lowing things:  the  entire  sermon  as  related  to  the 
text  the  proposition  and  divisions  of  a  sermon  as 
related  to  the  subject,  or  the  divisions  alone  as  related 
to  the  proposition.  It  is,  yet  again,  restricted  more 
narrowly  to  the  amplification  of  each  separate  division 
of  the  discourse,  and  of  all  of  them  collectively.  The 
text,  the  proposition,  and  the  divisions  being  given, 
criticism  designates  the  remainder  of  the  sermon  as  the 
"  development,"  and  applies  the  term  either  to  a  divis- 
ion separately,  or  to  all  the  divisions  collectively.  If 
true  to  its  object,  the  development  is  an  unfolding  of 
the  salient  thoughts  expressed  in  the  divisions,  and  no 
more.  In  this  sense,  the  work  of  development  is  the 
composition  of  the  sermon  as  distinct  from  the  plan- 
ning of  it  It  is  the  doing  of  the  thing  proposed  in  the 
plan.  It  is  the  clothing  of  the  skeleton  of  the  sermon 
with  the  elements  of  effective  discourse.     It  is  in  thia 

426 


UtOT.  XXX.]    THE  DEVELOPMENT :    PREREQUISITES.         427 

last  and  most  limited  sense  that  I  employ  the  word  in 
discussing  the  development  as  one  of  the  constituent 
parts  of  a  sermon. 

The  work  of  developing,  as  distinct  from  the  plan  ^ 
ning  of  a  discourse,  defines  itself  in  practice  beyond  the 
possibility  of  mistake.  You  doubtless  are  sensible  oi 
this  in  your  own  experience.  When  you  have  chosen 
a  text,  evolved  a  proposition,  and  outlined  a  plan  of  a 
sermon,  the  bulk  of  your  work  is,  in  the  majority  of 
cases,  yet  to  be  executed.  You  are  now  to  amplify,  to 
expand,  to  unfold,  to  evolve,  to  fill  up,  to  enlarge  upon, 
to  develop,  —  whatever  you  may  call  it ;  and  the  thing 
is  clearly  distinct  from  any  other  process  concerned  in 
the  building  of  a  sermon.  To  many  preachers  it  is  a 
work  of  much  greater  difficulty  than  is  involved  in  any 
other  process.  It  sets  invention  at  work  more  severely, 
and  calls  into  service  a  greater  variety  of  mental  powers, 
than  does  any  other  part  of  a  discourse. 

II.  Let  it  be  observed,  then,  that  the  foundation  of 
a  good  development  is  laid  in  certain  things  which  pre- 
cede its  execution. 

1st,  Of  these  prerequisites  should  be  named,  the 
possession  of  the  right  quantity  and  quality  of  ma- 
terials. Obviously,  if  your  mind  is  filled  with  only 
anatomical  materials,  you  must  fail  in  the  attempt  to 
make  them  live  in  a  breathing  sermon.  Moreover,  a 
certain  degree  of  fullness  of  mind  with  right  material 
is  essential  to  forcible  development.  Sparse  thoughts 
invite  feeble  utterance,  even  of  that  which  a  man  has 
to  say.  Thoughts  must  crowd  thoughts,  that  any  thing 
may  come  out  with  force.  It  is  the  full  fountain  which 
babbles  to  the  surface.  We  often  speak  of  digested 
and  undigested  thought.  The  figure  is  apt.  A  healthy 
stomach  is  a  coarse  symbol,  but  a  true  one,  of  a  liealthy 


^ 


cr 


-^ 


\ 


128  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.         [lect.  xrr. 

mind.  Physicians  tell  us  that  a  certain  quantity  of 
food  in  the  digestive  organs  is  necessary  to  vigorous 
digestion.  Similar  to  this  are  certain  mental  opera- 
tions./ Fullness  of  mind  on  a  subject  of  thought  is  es- 
sential to  the  best  utterance  of  thought^  Solid  thought 
is  requisite.  Powerful  utterance  must  be  the  ontflo'W 
y  )  of  a  well-stocked  brain. 
j[  /  (1)  Yet  on  this  topic  of  the  invention  of  materials 
*  '  criticism  can,  in  my  judgment,  say  very  little  that  is  of 
practical  use.  The  ancient  rhetoricians  —  the  only 
great  ones  the  world  has  known  —  thought  otherwise ; 
and  it  requires  some  courage  to  dissent  from  them  in 
this  thing.  They  elaborated  very  carefully  the  hints 
by  which  they  imagined  that  a  mind  in  composing,  or 
preparing  to  compose,  could  be  assisted  in  gathering  its 
stock  of  thought.  It  was  believed  that  the  mind  might 
put  out  certain  feelers  into  any  subject,  and  invent, 
accordingly,  both  the  divisions  and  the  development  of 
discourse.  Possibly  the  early  thinkers  of  the  race 
found  practical  help  in  these  artificial  aids ;  but  of  what 
use  are  they  now?  What  modern  author  or  speaker 
has  ever  consciously  employed  them?  Certain  it  is 
that  the  literary  and  professional  world  has  laid  them 
aside.  The  stock  of  the  world's  thought  has  grown 
large,  and  authorship  and  speech  now  live  upon  that. 
I  can  explain  in  no  other  way  the  fact  that  expedients 
\\hich  Aristotle  —  perhaps  the  master-mind  of  the  race 
—  could  commend  are  never  adopted  by  the  leaders  of 
y^         modern  thought. 

C]\  (2)  The  oratorical  instinct,  at  least,  claims  freedom 

\y        from  such  artificial  helps.     All  that  criticism  can  do, 

therefore,  for  its  assistance  in  the  matter  of  invention, 

is  to  direct  it  to  the  cultivation  of  the  thinking  power 

In  actual  composing,  a  writer  must  take  what  comes  to 


LECT.  XXX.]    THE  DEVELOPMENT :    PREREQUISITES.         429 

him,  with  no  such  elaborate  searching  in  prescribed 
channels  of  inquiry.  I  know  nothing  of  any  process  of 
successful  composition  which  has  not  in  it  a  large  infu- 
sion of  the  element  which  the  world  calls  "  chance." 
As  a  Christian  preacher,  I  willingly  give  to  it  a  more 
sacred  name.  That  preacher  is  not  to  be  envied  who 
knows  nothing  in  his  own  experience  of  a  secondary 
fulfillment  of  the  promise:  "It  shall  be  given  yoa  in 
that  same  hour  what  ye  shall  speak."  Yet  divine  sug- 
gestion uses,  not  ignores,  the  laws  of  mind. 
/(3)  When,  therefore,  a  division  of  discourse  pre-  /^ 
sents  a  blank  to  your  mind  which  you  do  not  know  ->' 
how  to  fill,  set  your  mind  to  thinking  upon  it.  Fix  the 
mind  on  the  thing  in  hand :  check  rambling  thought : 
have  done  with  reverie.  This  is  the  first  and  the  vital 
thing.     Then  group  together  all  that  you  do  know  of  ^ 

the  matter.     Something  you  know,  or  you  could  not 
state  your  thought.     Use  that  something  as  a  bait  to  ^f 

suggestion.     Follow  it  into   its   natural   surroundings.        ')^. 
Write  it  down,  and  thus  obtain  the  suggestive  aid  of 
the  eye.  AA  pen  in  hand,  and   an   eye  on  a  written    >. 
thought  are  marvelous   allies   to  the  thinking  power.     I 
Use  in  this  manner  whatever  of  the  common  stock  of  ^ 
thought  on  any  subject  you  find  in  present  possession. 
The  stock  will  grow  upon  your  hands  inevitably.     Tlie 
law  of  your  experience  will  be  that  to  him  that  hath 
Ghall  be  given.    ,/  / 

(4)  If,  by  such  self-disciplinary  communings,  you  ^ 
originate  nothing  worth  saying,  resort  to  suggestive 
reading  for  a  while.  Read  any  thing  which  stimulates 
thinking.  /You  have  probably  discovered  in  you:  libra- 
ries, before  this  time,  one  or  two  authors  whom  you  , 
never  can  read  for  a  half-hour  listlessly,  j  They  are 
awakening  powers  to  your  power.     Your  mind  always 


430  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.         [j^eoi, 

springs  at  their  bidding.  They  have  become  your 
intellectual  auxiliaries  and  friends.  Turn  to  such  vol- 
umes, and  use  them  for  the  stimulus  which  they  furnish. 
The  thing  needed  is  a  mental  awakening  and  uplifting 
which  shall  bring  within  your  range  of  vision  a  broadei 
intellectual  scenery.  Thus  uplifted,  the  mind  obtains 
inspiration,  and,  thus  inspired,  it  may  go  back  to  the 
thing  in  hand,  tremulous  with  inventive  ardor.  Such  a 
process,  or  something  equivalent  to  it,  you  will  find  to 
be  effective  in  breaking  the  dead-lock  which  is  often  so 
discouraging  to  a  young  preacher,  and  which  seems  to 
spring  from  vacancy  of  mind.  There  is  no  such  thing 
as  vacancy  of  mind.  The  dead-lock  ceases  the  instant 
that  you  succeed  in  putting  an  end  to  reverie.  One 
of  the  remedies  of  physical  lock-jaw  is  a  smart  charge 
from  an  electric  battery.  Similar  is  the  remedy  for  a 
speechless  mind. 

If  any  one  finds  practical  assistance  from  conducting 
the  thinking  process  by  the  categories  of  the  ancient 
rhetoricians,  there  can  be  no  objection.  But  I  have  yet 
to  see  the  youthful  preacher  who  does  find  practical 
aid  in  such  devices,  or  the  practised  writer  who  ever 
employs  them.  With  such  self-disciplinary  use  as  I 
have  advised  of  the  materials  which  one  finds  at  spon- 
taneous command  on  any  theme,  the  oratorical  instinct 
of  an  educated  mind  may  be  safely  left  to  work  its  own 
way  to  the  requisite  increase  of  stock.  The  difficulty 
is  mental  inertia,  and,  when  that  is  removed,  mental 
floimdering.  Get  rid  of  these,  and  production  follows 
in  orderly  and  rich  abundance,  like  that  of  any  other 
work  of  creation. 

2d,  But  this  work  of  inventing  materials  suggests 
another  prerequisite  of  a  good  development.  It  is  a 
settlement  of  the  question,  What  kind  of  treatment 


^nb^ 


I 


LEOT.  XXX.]    THE  DEVELOPMENT :    PREREQUISITES.  431 

does  the  thought  in  hand  require  ?  The  question  to  be 
asked  is,  What  does  this  division  need  in  order  to  bend 
its  development*  to  the  aim  of  the  sermon  ?  la  there 
any  thing  here  to  be  explained,  any  thing  to  be  proved, 
any  thing  to  be  intensified  by  illustration,  any  thing  to 
be  applied  by  direct  hortation?  Some  one  of  these 
elements  of  all  composing  must  be  needed.  If  more 
than  one  are  needed,  the  inquiry  is.  In  what  proportion 
and  in  what  order  shall  the  two  or  more  be  intermin- 
gled? Consciously  or  unconsciously,  every  mind  in 
the  act  of  successful  composition  does  propose  to  itself, 
and  does  answer,  these  inquiries.  They  are  the  nearest 
approach  which  modern  authorship  makes  to  the  use 
of  the  Aristotelian  categories. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  incongruous  character  of 
many  discourses  is  due  mainly  to  inattention  to  such 
inquiries.  If  you  prove  when  you  ought  to  illustrate, 
or  illustrate  when  you  ought  to  prove,  or  do  either  or 
both  when  you  ought  to  explain,  or  prove,  illustrate, 
and  explain  when  you  ought  to  exhort,  or  exhort  when 
you  oughtjl;jQ..j3^3iiy.4JaiDg  else  rather  than  that,  you 
inevitably  flounder  into  an  incongruous  and  inefficient 
development.  No  amount  or  intrinsic  excellence  of 
materials  can  atone  for  the  loss  of  the  fundamental 
virtue  of  speaking  to  the  point. 

It  becomes,  then,  an  inquiry  of  vital  moment  to  a 
good  development.  How  shall  a  preacher  judge  when 
to  explain,  when  to  prove,  when  to  illustrate,  when  to 
exhort,  and  when  and  how  to  intermingle  these  pro- 
cesses ?  Beyond  a  few  simple  hints,  the  oratorical  in- 
stinct must  be  left  to  act  at  its  own  discretion.  Criticism 
can  only  make  the  following  suggestions. 

(1)  Judge,  in  part,  by  the  genius  of  the  subject. 
On  the  very  face  of  it  a  subject  may  demand  one 


i32  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lbot. 

method  of  treatment,  and  as  decisively  repel  another. 
Some  themes  must  be  treated,  if  presented  at  all  to  a 
popular  audience,  by  illustration  mainly.  Others  must 
be  treated  argumentatively.  To  the  one  class,  argu- 
ment would  be  frigid ;  to  the  other  class,  an  imperati\-  e 
necessity.  For  example;  consider  for  a  moment  th« 
two  subjects,  "  The  Love  of  Christ,"  and  "  The  Extent 
of  the  Atonement."  Suppose  that  you  develop  the  first 
of  these  argumentatively,  and  the  second  historically. 
You  prove  that  Christ  loved  man,  and  you  describe 
pictorially  the  range  of  the  Atonement.  It  is  not  dif- 
ficult to  see,  that,  in  each  of  these  cases,  the  genius  of 
the  subject  enters  a  protest.  The  two  themes  need  to 
change  places.  You  have  proved  where  you  should 
have  pajnted,  and  painted  where  you  should  have  rea- 
soned.    Your  sky  is  green,  and  your  grass,  blue. 

(2)  Judge  of  the  method  of  treatment,  in  part,  by 
the  character  of  the  audience.  An  illiterate  audience 
may  require  an  explanatory  sermon  on  a  topic  of  which 
a  cultured  audience  may  demand  proof,  and  an  audience 
of  children  a  pictorial  discussion.  Many  hortatory  ser- 
mons have  been  preached  in  college  chapels,  but  never 
one  as  a  concio  ad  clerum  in  the  week  of  commencement. 
The  character  of  the  audience  obviously  determines  to 
common  sense  the  rhetorical  development  of  many 
discourses.  The  oratorical  instinct  must  be  woefully 
warped  or  indolent,  if  it  fails  to  respond,  in  many 
instances,  to  the  necessities  of  the  case  in  hand,  without 
any  other  hint  than  this  given  by  the  character  of  the 
audience.  Rarely  will  it  be  so  distorted  as  in  the  case  of 
one  preacher  in  the  chapel  of  this  seminary,  who  devel- 
oped one  division  of  his  sermon  in  the  form  of  an 
exhortation  to  aged  sinners,  at  a  time  when  the  only 
gray-haired  man  in  the  house  was  a  saint  of  sixty  years* 
growth. 


tECT.  XXX.]    THE  DEVELOPMENT :    PREREQUISITES.         433 

(3)  Judge  of  the  method  of  treatment,  in  f  art,  by 
the  demands  of  the  occasion.  The  key  to  the  problem 
Is  sometimes  found  in  the  occasion ;  not  in  the  subject, 
not  in  the  hearers.  Is  the  occasion  exceptional  ?  Is  it 
a  funeral,  a  Thanksgiving,  a  Fast  Day,  a  Christmas,  a 
New-Year's  Day?  Is  there  a  peculiar  state  of  things 
nmong  the  people?  Are  they  in  a  religious  revival? 
Are  they  on  the  eve  of  one  ?  Are  they  in  the  "wake  of 
one  ?  Are  they  in  a  religious  decline  ?  In  the  midst 
of  a  poweiful  religious  excitement,  it  is  surprising  what 
an  amount  of  hortation  an  audience  will  bear  with 
quick  response  of  conscience,  when  the  half  of  it  at 
any  other  time  would  stupefy  them.  On  the  other 
hand,  when  the  wave  of  revival  has  receded,  the  effect 
is  painful,  if  the  pulpit  struggles  to  perpetuate  the 
quantity  and  quality  of  hortatory  discussion  which  the 
revival  created  a  demand  for,  but  which  now  falls  on 
satiated  ears,  f  Such  untimely  exhortation  is  like  ham- 
mering iron  when  its  red-heat  is  gone,  j 

(4)  Judge  of  rhetorical  development,  in  part,  by  the 
recent  proportions  of  your  preaching,  in  respect  to  its 
rhetorical  character.  If  argumentative  discourse  has 
largely  preponderated  in  your  pulpit  for  a  while,  that 
may  be  a  sufficient  reason  for  a  change.  Follow  such 
an  argumentative  period  with  illustrative  sermons.  The 
need  of  such  may  properly  have  a  retrospective  bear- 
ing, and  may  direct  your  choice  of  subjects.  Change 
the  diet,  and  you  may  promote  the  more  robust  health. 
Other  things  being  equal,  the  most  versatile  pulpit  is 
the  most  effective.  Few  things  which  need  so  much 
study  receive  so  little  as  the  adjustment  of  proportions 

in  the  pulpit.  / 

(5)  Judge  of  the  rhetorical  treatment,  in  part,  by       ,^ 
personal  tastes,  information,  and  moods.     I  group  these 


434  THE  IHEORY  OF  PREACHING.         Tlect.  xtx. 

three  things  together  as  expressive  of  a  preacher's  indi- 
viduality respecting  the  point  before  us.  This  criterion 
is  more  frequently  abused  than  normally  used.  But 
abuse  is  no  argument  against  man^  use.  You  may 
sometimes  be  wise  in  treating  a  subject  in  that  method 
in  which  you  will  probably  succeed  most  happily.  This 
will  sometimes  be  that  into  which  your  own  tastes 
enable  you  to  enter  most  enthusiastically.  It  may 
now  and  then  be  that  which  your  present  information 
will  enable  you  to  execute  most  intelligently.  It  may 
occasionally  be  that  in  which  a  present  mood  of  feeling 
may  enable  you  to  compose  most  rapidly,  and  there- 
fore most  intensely.  Within  certain  guarded  limits,  a 
preacher's  individuality  has  a  claim  to  authority.  In 
this,  as  in  other  things,  a  man's  best  work  is  happy 
work.  It  is  whole-souled  work.  It  is  work  to  which 
the  mind  springs  expectantly,  even  jubilantly.  God 
never  meant  that  any  man  should  work  wretchedly. 
Dejection  is  never  a  divine  teaching.  God  has  never 
designed  that  a  man's  work  should  be  against  the  grain 
of  his  intellectual  make.  This  is  pre-eminently  true  of 
the  work  of  the  pulpit/^  The  most  effective  preachers 
are  elastic  and  joyous  men.  )  Eternal  decrees  written  in 
a  preacher's  mental  constitution  lie  back  of  the  best  of 
sermons. 

These  suggestions  comprise  the  substance  of  all  that 
criticism  can  wisely  say  to  the  oratorical  instinct  re 
specting  the  choice  of  rhetorical  method  in  the  develop- 
ment of  discourses.  Beyond  these,  criticism  knows 
nothing,  and  needs  to  know  nothing.  Mother-wit  does 
aU  the  rest.  To  that  instinct  thus  disciplined  there 
are  no  impracticable  subjects,  unless  they  are  dead  sub- 
jects. Good  sermons  can  thus  be  made  on  any  subjects 
which  have  living  roots  in  Christian  thought. 


LiiCT.  XXX.]    THE  DEVELOPMENT  :    PREREQUISITES.         435 

3d,  The  third  of  those  prerequisites  to  a  good  de- 
velopment, which  lie  back  of  its  execution,  is  a  certain 
mental  dexterity  which  comes  from  practice  only.  In 
every  art  there  is  a  knack  which  is  never  a  gift.  It  is 
the  fruit  of  an  apprenticeship.  I  stand  in  awe  of  a 
carpenter,  a  tailor,  a  machinist,  a  locksmith,  a  sailor, 
who  are  well  to  do  at  their  trades.  They  manipulate 
their  work  with  such  marvelous  adroitness,  that  to 
me  it  is  miracle.  They  are  all  experts  from  another 
world  than  mine.  Their  arms,  fingers,  legs,  feet,  eyes 
seem  inspired.  Their  very  shoulders  have  motions  of 
use  which  I  can  no  more  imitate  than  I  can  the  swoop 
of  an  eagle.  They  put  soul  into  dead  matter.  A 
carpet-loom,  the  work  of  somebody's  genius,  has  iron 
fingers  more  sensitive  than  mine.  Its  dumb  lips  pro- 
nounce verdict  upon  a  defective  thread  which  my  eyes 
can  not  see,  even  when  it  stops  to  give  time  for  a 
search.  They  who  do  these  things  ask  me  what  they 
can  do  for  me,  and  I  can  only  mumble,  "  What  shall 
be  done  ?  "  They  are  the  wise  men,  and  I  am  the  fool. 
Yet  not  a  man  of  them  was  born  inspired.  Not  one 
escaped  the  drudgery  of  an  apprenticeship,  long  and 
hard,  and  inflexible  as  fate. 

The  same  principle  holds  good  in  literary  working. 
How  to  do  it  never  comes  from  knowing  only  what  to 
do.  It  comes,  in  part,  from  doing.  It  comes  frcm 
failures,  awkwardness,  blunders,  despairs,  infinitesimal 
beginnings  of  success,  happy  hits  which  are  never  re- 
peated, and  the  slow  growth  of  faculties  which  a  man 
can  never  outrun  in  composing.  They  hold  him  back 
to  give  them  time  to  grow.  A  good  development  of  a 
thought  is  never  achieved  without  this  knack  of  doing 
the  right  thing.  Moreover,  this  knack  of  doing  is 
always  a  specialty.     We  must  drill  for  the   specific 


436  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.         [lkct.  xxx 

thing  we  have  to  do.  We  can  never  succeed  by  ap 
prenticeship  to  the  universe  in  general.  An  author 
does  not  get  the  knack  of  oral  discourse  from  the  mak- 
ing of  books.  A  critic  does  not  get  the  knack  of 
preaching  from  the  criticism  of  sermons.  Journalists 
say  that  it  is  no  matter  what  a  man  can  do  in  the 
making  of  books,  sermons,  speeches :  he  can  not  write 
well  for  the  newspapers,  till  he  has  served  his  time 
at  it.  They  are  right.  A  man  can  do  nothing  well  till 
he  has  "served  his  time  at  it." 

This  need  of  mental  dexterity  in  good  preaching  I 
notice,  not  because  criticism  can  do  much  to  promote 
it,  but  because  the  fact  of  its  existence,  and  the  laws 
of  its  growth,  are  a  great  encouragement  to  young 
preachers.  It  should  teach  you  not  to  waste  yourselves 
in  fruitless  despair,  or  fears  of  failure.  Of  course  you 
will  fail.  Make  up  your  minds  to  failure.  Expect  to 
waste  a  great  many  sermons.  Expect  to  see  some  of 
your  best  sermons  slipping  out  of  your  hands,  and  tak- 
ing to  themselves  wings  of  flame.  But  be  assured  that 
every  such  discovery  of  failure  is  a  germ  of  success. 
You  are  uplifted  by  so  much  height  as  you  consciously 
stand  above  your  yesterday's  work.  You  have  only  to 
lay  out  on  a  present  effort  the  best  of  your  present 
power,  and  that  very  effort  begets  power.  Thus  your 
mind  grows  with  perpetual  increments  of  the  knack 
of  doing. 

III.  Passing,  now,  from  these  fundamental  prerequi 
sites  of  a  good  development,  which  lie  back  of  its  exe- 
cution, let  us  observe,  in  the  third  place,  the  chief 
characteristics  of  a  good  development. 

1st,  Of  these  the  first  is  unity.  A  division  amplified 
is  a  discourse  in  miniature.  Its  singleness  is  essential 
to  secure  speaking  to  the  point. 


LECT.  XXX.]    DEVELOPMENT :    CHARACTERISTIC*.  437 

(1)  Unity  is  specially  sacrificed  by  an  unconscious  \ 
discussipri.,  .of  .different  things  with  one  heading.  This  J 
may  arise  from  the  confounding  of  similar  ideas.  A 
division  is  upon  the  Christian  grace  of  patience ;  but 
tlie  train  of  thought  branches  off  into  remarks  upon 
fortitude,  resignation,  fidelity.  The  resemblance  of 
these  passive  graces  misleads;  and  a  development 
which  begins  with  one  thing  ends  with  another".  This 
indiscriminate  composing  is  the  cause  of  a  vast  amount 
of  remark  in  sermons  upon  religion  in  general.  Every 
religious  thought  has  some  sort  of  affiliation  with  every 
other  religious  thought.  Weak  thinking  has  always  9 
gravitation  downward  from  the  species  to  the  genus 
It  is  deceived  by  a  resemblance  into  the  utterance  of 
platitudes. 

Another  form  of  the  same  defect  is  a  confusion  aris- 
ing from  resemblance  or  sameness  of  words.  Two 
words  resembling  each  other  may  form  an  arch,  over 
which  the  development  passes  from  the  thing  in  hand 
to  the  thing  in  the  other  hand.  Have  you  not  listened 
to  sermons  in  which  the  guilt  of  selfishness  was  con- 
demned in  a  strain  of  remark  which  involved  the  con- 
demnation of  all  forms  of  self-love?  Few  theological 
blunders  are  fraught  with  so  much  mischief  in  the 
delusion  of  conscience  as  is  the  one  involved  in  that 
confusion  of  terms.  The  sameness  of  a  word  in  differ- 
ent senses  is  more  frequently  still  the  switch  which 
sends  the  train  upon  a  false  track.  Some  preachers 
of  long  experience,  probably  have  never  preached  a 
self-consistent  sermon  on  faith,  because  the  word  is  sus- 
ceptible of  such  a  variety  of  meanings. 

Another  way  in  which  unity  of  development  may  be 
unconsciously  sacrificed  is  by  the  confusion  of  thought 
springing  from  the  indefiniteness  of  figurative  language. 


4d8  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.         [user,  xix 

Wheu  figurative  language  droops  its  wings,  and  be- 
comes literal,  the  truth  which  it  expressed  in  the  air 
may  become  a  falsehood  on  the  ground.  Yet  a  preach- 
er not  sharp  in  watching  the  change  may  affirm  both 
in  one  paragraph.  A  vast  amount  of  turbid  discussion 
about  our  "guilty  nature"  has  had  its  origin  in  this 
unconscious  transition  from  figure  to  letter,  and  from 
letter  to  figure.  The  figure  is  made  to  drop  its  poetic 
sense ;  and  in  the  same  breath  a  sermon  discusses  inter- 
changeably constitutional  depravity  and  willful  sin. 
In  the  discussion  of  central  doctrines  of  our  faith,  this 
unconscious  passing  from  the  figure  to  the  letter  makes 
sad  havoc  with  theological  consistency. 

One  other  form  of  this  defect  arises  from  pressing 
to  an  extreme  the  suggestions  of  analogy.  One  of  the 
most  difficult  things  to  conduct  well  in  discourse  is  the 
use  of  analogies.  The  difficulty  is  owing  chiefly  to 
the  double  use  which  may  be  made  of  them.  Analogy 
may  prove  a  thing ;  but,  again,  it  may  only  illustrate 
a  thing.  The  difficulty,  therefore,  if  the  aim  is  argu- 
ment, is  to  stop  where  proof  ends,  and  not  to  pursue 
the  analogy  into  remote  bearings  in  which  it  becomes 
illustration  only.  I  once  heard  the  boy's  game  of  mar 
bles  adduced  as  logical  evidence  of  the  earth-born  origin 
of  man.  "  See,"  said  the  wise  man,  "  no  sooner  does 
the  snow  melt  in  the  spring,  and  uncover  the  soil,  than 
down  goes  human  nature  on  all-fours  to  greet  and 
grovel  on  mother-earth."  Whatever  else  this  was, 
argument  it  was  not.  Yet  much  of  that  which  goes  by 
the  name  of  analogous  reasoning  suffers  from  thus  pur- 
suing analogy  beyond  the  province  of  logic  into  the  da- 
main  of  fancy,  without  consciousness  of  the  transition. 


LECTURE  XXXI. 

THE  DEVELOPMENT:   CHABA0TERI8TI0S. 

(2)  The  unity  of  a  good  development  requires  fur-  .  1 
ther  consideration  by  observing  a  second  class  of  errors 
by  which  it  is  sacrificed.  These  consist  of  intentional 
digressions.  Every  thing  is  intentional  digression  in 
which  a  speaker  consciously  dallies  with  the  thing  in 
hand.  This  error  may  take  the  form  of  discourse  with- 
out construction.  This  is  the  ideal  of  a  certain  class 
of  preachers.  Religious  talk,  without  connection,  and 
without  aim  other  than  the  general  one  of  "pious 
remark,"  may  be  capped  with  a  text,  and  dignified 
with  a  subject,  when  neither  is  more  than  a  figure-head. 
Such  a  sermon  is_all__digression.  That  is,  it  has  no 
center  of  converging  thought:  its  desultory  materials 
have  only  the  centrifugal  power. 

Again:  digression  may  take  the  form  of  talking 
agaicst  time.  A  speaker  in  the  United  States  Senate 
once  spoke  twenty-four  hours  continuously  in  order  to 
compel  the  close  of  the  session  before  a  certain  vote 
should  be  taken.  It  was  said,  that,  in  that  time,  he 
rambled  over  every  political  topic  within  the  knowledge 
of  man.  Unity  of  impression  requires  intensity  of  aim ; 
and  an  intense  aim  shuts  out  every  thing  but  necessi-  __^ 
ties.  The  arrow  which  strikes  the  mark  goes  straight 
and  quick.     The  bullet  which  kills  pauses  for  nothing 

439 


440  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [lect.  xxxi. 

between.  Much  desultory  remark  in  sermons  springs 
from  transient  relaxation  of  mental  intensity  in  com 
posing.  For  the  moment,  the  preacher  speaks  to  fill 
time ;  and  he  knows  that  he  does  so.  Necessary  mate- 
rial does  not  crowd  for  utterance,  and  he  consciously 
fills  in  with  commonplaces.  Commonplace  is  always 
the  fruit  of  indifferent  or  of  jaded  thinking. 

Again:  digression  may  take  the  form  of  excessive 
illustration.  The  difficulties  of  composition  must  have 
already  disclosed  to  you  the  temptation  which  a 
preacher  experiences  to  illustrate  for  other  purposes 
than  to  meet  the  necessities  of  the  thing  in  hand.  We 
are  tempted  to  illustrate  for  the  sake  of  the  illustra- 
tion, its  beauty,  its  novelty,  its  eccentricity.  We  are 
tempted  to  illustrate  for  the  sake  of  rhetorical  display 
display  of  ingenuity,  of  learning,  of  originality.  We 
are  tempted  to  illustrate  for  the  entertainment  of  an 
audience.  We  are  tempted  to  fill  in  with  anecdote  for 
the  sake  of  the  story,  not  because  the  thing  in  hand 
demands  the  anecdote.  You  all  know  a  certain  popular 
lecturer,  whose  passion  for  anecdote  is  so  great  as  to 
have  degenerated  into  what  De  Quincey  calls  "anec- 
dotage."  Illustrative  stories  have  so  multiplied  in 
number,  that  now  the  larger  portion  of  the  tiv  e  spent 
in  listening  to  him  is  devoted  to  laughter  at  hjv  jocular 
coruscations.  His  hearers  find  that  their  digei.jv^n  im- 
proves- more  than  their  culture.  All  these  foMiiS  of 
illustrative  digression  are  claptrap.  That  they  ^nn  be 
linked  logically  to  the  subject  does  not  save  them.  Irom 
the  charge.  Every  thing  conceivable  can  be  iiT^ked 
logically  to  every  other  thing  by  some  sort  of  under- 
ground connections.  Such  illustrations  do  n.t  adva  ^ce 
the  subject.     They  do  not  carry  it :  it  carries  them. 

Further :  digression  may  take  the  form  of  a  delib^^Jte 


LfiCT.  XXXI.]    DEVELOPMENT  :    CHAEACTERISTICS.  441 

change  of  theme.  In  such  a  case  the  unity  of  the  dis- 
cussion, and  all  other  qualities  of  intense  discourse  are 
sacrificed  to  the  single  purpose  of  pricking  the  ears  of 
an  audience.  Rowland  Hill  used  to  practice  and  defend 
this  as  a  legitimate  expedient  in  the  pulpit.  He  claimed 
the  right  to  introduce  any  number  of  doctrines  into  a 
sermon,  if  he  found  the  variety  necessary  to  sustain 
the  flagging  interest  of  the  hearers.  With  a  delicacy 
of  :aste  equaled  only  by  the  severity  of  his  logic,  he 
himself  compared  his  homiletic  policy  to  the  process  of  ^ 
milking  cows.  Said  he,  "The  gospel  is  an  excellent 
milch  cow,  which  always  gives  plenty  of  milk,  and  of 
the  best  quality.  I  first  pull  at  justification;  then  I 
give  a  plug  at  adoption,  and  afterwards  a  tit  at  sanc- 
tification;  and  so  on,  till  I  have  filled  my  pail  with 
gospel  milk."  "Gospel  milk,"  indeed!  We  are  told 
that  the  gospel  is  to  be  preached  to  babes;  but  are 
calves  specified?  The  bovine  theory  of  preaching  is 
not  Pauline. 

2d,  The  second  characteristic  of  a  good  development 
is  pertinency.  The  Rev.  William  Jay  relates  that  he 
once  delivered  a  speech  before  the  Bible  Society  in 
Bath,  and,  soon  after,  a  committee  of  the  society  waited 
upon  him  to  ask  for  the  publication  "of  so  much  of 
the  speech  as  related  to  the  subject  in  hand." 

The  following  points  may  be  noted  as  things  which 
will  illustrate  themselves  in  your  practice. 

(1)  Strict  unity  will  commonly  secure  pertinency  of 
development.  If  discourse  holds  to  one  thing,  it  will 
probably  bs  the  one  thing  which  the  division  proposes. 
Rarely  will  an  educated  preacher  state  one  thing,  and 
then  at  the  very  start  discuss  another  thing.  The  arrow 
when  on  the  string  is  usually  aimed  right.  Guard^unity 
^_  intense  composing,  and  pertinency  will  probably 
follow.  ^"^ 


442  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [leot.  xxxl 

(2)  Irrelevancy  of  material  often  concerns  only  its 
location.  Remarks  are  often  relevatt  to  a  different 
division  from  that  under  which  they  occur.  Not  the 
choice  of  material,  but  its  locality,  is  in  fault.  It  15 
relevant  to  the  subject,  but  belongs  there,  not  here. 

(3)  Irrelevancy  of  material  is  often  limited  to  iso- 
lated remarks.  It  seldom  covers  whole  pages  con- 
secutively. It  blotches  them  over  with  single  remarks 
in  which  the  preacher  has  written  with  momentary 
languor;  and  the  progress  of  thought  is  impeded 
accordingly.  Is  it  necessary  to  correct  such  isolated 
examples  of  irrelevant  remark?  What  harm  do  they 
do  ?  ( I  answer.  They  are  to  discourse  what  excessive 
friction  is  to  machinery./  Intense  discourse  does  not 
tolerate  these  fragmentary  impertinences,  and  intense 
impression  is  always  impaired  by  them. 

(4)  The  habit  of  precise  and  intense  thinking  will 
tend  to  adjust  the  details  of  a  development  as  rigidly 
as  it  plans  the  outline  of  a  sermon.  Why  should  it  not 
do  so  ?  Every  sentence  of  a  sermon  is  a  subdivision  of 
something.  The  same  law  of  close  thinking  should 
govern  the  species  as  the  genus.  Yet  just  here  occurs 
the  collapse  in  the  power  of  many  sermons.  Good  plans 
are  feebly  executed.  Many  minds,  as  I  have  before 
remarked,  think  vigorously  in  outlines,  but  languidly  in 
details.  They  become  enervated  when  they  pass  from 
the  work  of  the  scholar  to  the  work  of  the  orator. 
Any  one  of  us  could  have  constructed  what  Milton 
calls  "The  Argument"  of  the  "Paradise  Lost;"  but 
only  Milton  could  produce  the  poem.  Similar  is  the 
difference  of  which  we  are  often  sensible  in  passing 
from  schojarship  to  oratory,  from  logic  to  rhetoric,  from 
reasoning  to  persuasion. 

What  is  the  obvious  remedy?    Simply  that  tturdj 


i^CT.  XXXI.]    DEVELOPMENT :    CHAHACTERISTICS.  443 

thinking  should  hold  its  own  to  the  end.  One  reason 
that  the  JPuritan  preaching  of  the  seventeenth  century 
was  so  vivacious,  in  spite  of  its  prolixity,  was  that  its 
thinking  was  so  vigorous.  It  could  suspend  argument 
to  interweave  illustration,  anecdote,  biography,  history, 
any  thing  which  would  illumine  the  train  of  thought, 
without  a  break  in  that  train,  and  without  the  creation 
of  any  sense  of  irrelevance.  This  was  done  with  such 
unconscious  adroitness,  that  the  sense  of  consecutive- 
ness  was  seldom  lost.  In  no  other  way  than  by  this 
intensity  of  thinking  power  could  the  prolix  sermons  . 
of  the  Puritan  divines  have  commanded  the  hearing 
they  received  from  popular  multitudes. 

(5)  Rhetorical  pertinence  often  requires  that  a  de- 
velopment shall  receive  a  more  vigorous  treatment  than 
is  demanded  by  the  mere  connections  of  logic.  Logical 
sequence  may  be  indirect  and  yet  unbroken.  Rhetorical 
force  may  be  so  diluted  by  indirectness  as  to  evaporate 
in  commonplaces.  Logic  deals  with  the  intellect  pure 
and  bimple  ;  rhetoric  deals  chiefly  with  tlie  sensibilities.  /]/' 
Intellect  may  thread  the  mazes  of  a  languid  develop-  ^" 
ment,  provided  that  logic  be  kept  unbroken ;  the  sen 
sibilities  can  not  always  do  that.  They  do  not  readily 
obey  threadlike  and  tortuous  lines  of  connection. 
They  require  obvious  continuity.  They  often  demand 
close  proximity  to  the  object  of  their  excitement. 
They  are  roused  by  boldness  of  representation.  They 
are  stimulated  by  high  coloring.  They  sometimes  need 
contrasts  of  coloring,  in  which  the  mind  passes  back 
and  forth  with  unconscious  speed.  To  preserve  abso- 
lute pertinence  of  material  in  such  a  process  is  a  far 
more  difficult  achievement  than  to  forge  the  links  of 
an  argument.  It  requires  more  T>n>-iToiin  fViinki-^ji 
power. 


444  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       Ilect. 

3d,  A  third  characteristic  of  a  good  development  is 
completeness.  The  development  is  to  the  division  in 
hand  what  the  divisions  collectively  are  to  the  proposi- 
tion.    The  one  should  exhaust  the  other. 

(1)  Completeness  of  development,  then,  may  be  obvi- 
ously sacrificed  by  the  omission  of  a  necessary  link  in 
the  argument. 

(2)  It  may  also  be  sacrificed  by  an  inadequate  state- 
ment of  the  strong  point  in  an  argument.  A  develop- 
ment should  not  claim  less  than  it  realh  proves.  A 
preacher  who  had  Daniel  Webster  for  a  hearer  once 
preached  on  the  evidences  of  Christianity.  One  divis- 
ion of  the  discourse  was  devoted  to  the  testimony  of 
the  sacred  writers  themselves.  This  was  amplified  so 
forcibly,  that  Mr.  Webster  saw  the  reach  of  it  beyond 
the  claim  of  the  preacher.  The  preacher  rested  his 
case  on  this  alternative:  "Either  ChristianHy  is  true, 
or  the  sacred  writers  were  deluded  men."  —  ^'  No,"  said 
Mr.  Webster,  "  the  alternative  is  stronger  than  that,  — 
jither  Christianity  is  true,  or  the  Apostles  we^-e  knaves. 
Their  testimony  is  credible,  or  it  is  downright  fraud.'' 
If  candor  forbids  a  preacher  to  claim  more  than  he 
proves,  fidelity  forbids  him  to  claim  less. 

(3)  Completeness  of  development  is  impaired  by  a 
want  of  clearness  of  connection.  Certain  passages  in 
every  prolonged  discourse  have  no  other  purpose  than 
to  make  connections.  Certain  sentences,  paragraphs, 
pages  are  to  a  discourse  as  a  whole  what  certain  words 
LQ  every  vocabulary  are  to  the  rest :  they  are  simply 
connectives.  By  themselves  they  are  forceless ;  yet 
without  them  discourse  would  be  impossible.  Without 
them,  men  could  commune  with  each  other  only  in 
ejaculations.  They  are  joints,  which  make  discourse 
continuous  and  flexible.     These  transitional  passages 


LECT.  xxxr.]    DEVELOPMENT :    CHARACTERISTICS.  446 

are  often  carelessly  constructed ;   and  the  result  is  a 
sense  of  inconsequence  in  the  progress  of  thought. 

(4)  Completeness  of  development  is  further  sacrificed 
by  a  want  of  forcible  presentation.  INIaterials  may  be 
unified,  pertinent,  connected,  and  yet  may  fail  for  the 
want  of  vividness.  Generally  the  defect  is  the  want  of 
illustration.  Pure  argument  seldom  does  itself  justice 
before  the  popular  mind.  The  same  is  true  of  purely 
didactic  explanation.  (No  man  can  discourse  orally  upon  ^ 
pure  mathematics.  /  Thejllustrative  element  in  popular 
discourse  is  necessary  to  completeness,  because  it  is 
necessary  to  forcible  impression.  Frequently  the  only 
change  which  criticism  can  suggest  in  a  development 
which  fails  of  its  object  is  not  in  the  stock  of  it,  nor  in 
its  frame-work,  but  in  its  temperature.  It  is  constructed 
of  good  material,  and  is  well  jointed ;  but  it  wants  glow. 
It  needs  to  be  recomposed  to  gain  intensity.  The  excel- 
lences which  it  has  will  not  come  forth  palpably  to  the 
popular  eye  without  red  heat. 

(5)  This  suggests  that  completeness  of  development 
is  often  sacrificed  by  excessive  qualifications  of  truth. 
Qualifications  should  never  be  the  equivalents  of  retrac- 
tions. The  father  of  Samuel  J.  Mills  was  the  pastor 
of  a  Congregational  Church  in  Connecticut.  He  was 
a  man  of  very  positive  opinions,  which  he  never  hesi- 
tated to  proclaim.  He  once  delivered  a  sermon  on 
the  text,  "  Train  up  a  child  in  the  way  he  should  go, 
and  when  he  is  old  he  will  not  depart  from  it."  At  the 
close  he  uttered  a  fervent  appeal  to  parents,  exhorting 
them  to  fidelity  in  obedience  to  the  text ;  and  ended  by 
saying,  "  After  all,  brethren,  character  depends  very 
much  on  the  blood."  Such  qualifications  are  practical 
contradictions:  they  expose  secret  convictions,  which 
seem  to  be  more  honest  than  those  which  have  bee« 


,  f 


V     ^         I        _...  lU      J..       .1 


446  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       [lect.  xxa 

avowed.  A  preacher  has  no  right  to  have  secret  con- 
victions on  any  thing  which  he  professes  to  preach. 
Qualifications  ought  not  to  contain  the  most  vivacious 
materials  of  a  discourse.  If  they  do,  they  will  be  re- 
membered when  the  statements  which  they  qualify  are 
forgotten. 

4thj  A  fourth  characteristic  of  a  good  development 
is  conciseness.  The  chief  distinction  of  the  eloquence 
of  Demosthenes  was  its  velocity  of  rhetorical  movement. 
One  critic  says  that  he  spoke  "  like  a  passionate  man 
tormented  by  the  truth."  Such  a  man  can  not  help 
speaking  with  quick  advances.  What  he  has  to  say  he 
says,  and  has  done  with  it.  Thought,  structure,  style 
are  all  condensed.  The  chinks  and  crevices  of  dis- 
course are  packed  full.  The  effect  in  utterance  is  a 
combination  of  weight  and  speed,  and  that  combination 
is  always  power :  it  is  like  the  power  of  a  cannon-ball. 
'  We  need  much  of  this  kind  of  discourse  in  the  pulpit. 
The  subjects  of  the  pulpit  invite  it.  The  moral  exigen- 
cies which  have  created  the  pulpit  demand  it.  Those 
preachers  whose  sympathy  with  the  work  of  the  pulpit 
is  the  most  profound  practice  it  spontaneously. 

(1)  Yet  it  should  be  remarked  that  conciseness  in 
preaching  must  be  subordinated  to  completeness  of  dis- 
cussion. Conciseness  is  a  relative  excellence :  it  must 
be  adjusted  to  subject  and  to  audience.  Some  themes 
in  the  pulpit,  discussed  before  some  audiences,  will  not 
bear  extreme  compactness :  they  need  amplitude.  Oral 
discourse  in  its  very  nature  requires  a  certain  bulk  of 
expression.  Proof,  often,  will  not  be  taken  in,  if  ex- 
pressed in  naked  syllogism.  Explanation  may  not  be 
understood  if  given  with  mathematical  brevity.  Illus- 
tration is  often  needed,  as  much  to  gain  time  for  the 
tliinking  power  of  a  hearer  to  rally  around  a  thought, 


LBOT.  xxxi.J    DEVELOPMENT :    CHABACTBRISTIC8.  447 

as  for  the  direct  purpose  of  making  it  luminous.     A 
laconic  development  is  fit  only  for  self-evident  truths. 

Some  of  President  Finney's  discourses  are  defective 
in  this  respect.  His  twenty  or  thirty  divisions,  barely 
stated,  with  but  one  or  two  sentences  exhaustive  of  each, 
sound  like  an  inventory.  Four  or  five  divisions  expanded 
to  such  length  as  to  be  rounded  and  full  would  be  more 
effective,  because  more  natural  to  the  procedure  of  ora- 
tory. Milton  speaks  of  the  "  close  palm  "  of  logic  and 
of  the  "  open  palm  "  of  rhetoric.  The  open  palm  is  the 
symbol  of  homiletic  development. 

(2)  Conciseness  of  development  is  promoted  by  cul- 
tivation of  the  condensing  power.  A  condensed  style 
is  concise  development.  But  I  mean  more  than  this. 
Every  expedient  which  reduces  circumlocutory  expres- 
sion promotes  the  power  and  the  habit  of  condensed 
thinking.  A  taste  for  short  words,  for  Saxon  words, 
for  unqualified  substantives,  for  crisp  sentences,  helps 
the  thinkirg  power  to  work  in  close  quarters.  A 
writer  who  acquires  a  fondness  for  speaking  brevities 
learns  to  think  in  brevities.  Happy  is  the  man  whose 
habit  it  is  to  think  laconically.  There  are  few  things 
in  which  the  re-action  of  style  on  thought  and  on  the 
thinking  force  is  so  obvious  as  in  the  growth  of  this 
condensing  power.  — — - 

(3)  Conciseness  of  development  depends  chiefly  on 
a  wise  retrenchment  of  materials.  The  work  is  mainly 
negative.  Eliminate  superfluous  thoughts,  say  only 
necessary  things,  depend  on  selection,  not  on  conglom* 
eration  of  materials,  and  conciseness  is  inevitalle. 
For  example,  avoid  needless  explanations.  We  ob- 
served the  necessity  of  this  in  expository  discourse. 
It  is  equally  needful  in  all  explanatory  development- 
Assume  all  that  can  safely  be  assumed  of  the  intelli' 


i 


448  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       [lect.  xxxl 

gence  of  the  hearer.  On  the  same  princijle,  avoid 
proof  of  things  which  can  safely  be  assumed.  A  wise 
pref\cher  studies  when  to  argue,  and  when  to  dictate. 
Do  not  try  to  prove  that  men  are  sinners,  that  time  is 
short,  that  death  is  certain,  that  eternity  is  important, 
that  truth  is  right.  The  most  stupendous  truths,  and 
sometimes  the  most  bitterly  contested,  must  generally 
be  assumed  in  preaching.  The  being  of  God,  the  ne- 
cessity of  revelation,  the  authority  of  conscience,  the 
truth  of  the  Scriptures,  the  facts  of  heaven  and  of 
hell  must  commonly  be  proclaimed  by  assumption. 

So  of  the  countless  minor  threads  of  thought  which 
make  up  the  woof  of  sermons:  speak  by  authority 
when  there  is  no  need  of  argument :  assume  as  much 
as  possible  of  existing  belief  in  the  hearer's  mind. 
Avoid  preaching  to  absent  opponents.  Some  preachers 
are  always  in  war-paint;  all  subjects  open  to  them 
controversially.  They  find  it  difficult  to  develop  a 
subject  pacifically.  A  vast  amount  of  needless  expan- 
sion in  sermons  would  be  saved,  if  preachers  would  on 
some  subjects  instruct  and  illustrate  more,  and  argue 
and  contend  less.  For  the  same  reason,  avoid  giving 
to  infidelity  an  undue  eminence  in  the  labors  of  the  pul- 
pit. Specially  if  a  preacher  has  been  himself  a  skeptic, 
is  he  apt  to  exhibit  an  excessive  sympathy  with  skeptics 
in  his  preaching  by  incessantly  preaching  to  them  or  at 
them.  A  wise  retrenchment  of  such  materials  would 
throw  out  from  many  sermons  remarks  which  are  rele- 
vant only  to  an  absent  audience. 

Note  here  a  brief  excursus  on  the  true  relation  of 
preaching  to  skeptics.  The  preaching  of  the  Rev. 
Albert  Barnes  betrayed  to  the  last  his  own  early  ex- 
perience of  infidelity.  It  was  the  chief  defect  in  his 
otherwise  masterly  pulpit.    Argument  needed  by  Infi* 


LBCT.  XXXI.]    DEVELOPMENT :   CHARACTERISTICS.  449 

dels  only  was  poured  out  in  profusion*  often  when, 
probably,  not  a  hearer  was  present  who  could  be  di- 
rectly benefited  by  it.  It  was  done  in  a  masterly  way ; 
the  only  difficulty  was  that  it  was  addressed  to  an 
assembly  of  believers.  It  may  be  generally  assumed 
that  the  hearers  of  the  gospel  are  at  least  nominal 
Christians.  As  a  rule,  skeptics  and  infidels  are  not 
frequenters  of  churches.  The  abandonment  of  the 
house  of  God  generally  precedes  the  development  of 
skepticism. 

Moreover,  skeptics  are  not  so  numerous  in  any 
Christian  country  as  they  are  often  imagined  to  be. 
Minorities  have  the  gift  of  speech  inordinately  devel- 
oped :  they  are  very  apt  to  vociferate,  and  are  often 
estimated  by  the  noise  they  make.  /  Did  you  ever  sit 
in  the  twilight  in  the  autumn,  wnen  three  or  four 
crickets  were  serenading  each  other  ?  They  made  the 
whole  house  ring:  one  would  think  that  they  were  a 
thousand  strong. )  So  we  exaggerate  the  numbers  and 
the  strength  of  infidelity,  so  far  as  the  masses  of  the 
people  are  concerned.  They  are  not  unbelievers  on 
any  large  scale,  and  never  have  been.  Indifferentism 
is  not  infidelity.  Skepticism  is  never  popular:  it  is 
aristocratic,  rather.  We  over-estimate  it,  if  we  judge 
it  by  the  airs  it  puts  on.  Therefore  be  wary  in  preach- 
ing against  infidelity.  Do  it  thoroughly  when  it  must 
be  done,  but  do  it  rarely.  Do  not  be  for  ever  firing 
with  a  telescopic  rifle  at  a  foe  invisible  to  the  naked 
eye.  Didactic  preaching  of  the  truth  is  a  much  more 
"direct  and  brief  process  than  the  pursuit  and  overthrow 
of  error.  Very  much  of  useless  expansion  in  sermons 
would  be  avoided,  if  we  should  preach  to  believers 
more,  and  to  unbelievers  less. 

For  similar  reasons,  avoid  illustration  beyond  the 


450  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       [lbct.  xxxi 

necessities  of  the  case.  The  common  stock  of  thought 
in  sermons  contains  much  which  needs  no  illustration^ 
more  which  needs  but  momentary  illustration,  and 
but  little  which  needs  illustration  piled  on  illustration. 
The  true  medium  is  variable :  it  varies  with  subject ;  it 
varies  with  audience.  Even  when  excess  of  illustration 
does  not  amount  to  intentional  digression,  it  may  sacri- 
fice that  compact  union  of  weight  and  bulk  which  is 
requisite  to  swift  movement  and  effective  stroke. 

On  the  same  principle,  avoid  useless  repetitions. 
Some  repetitions  popular  discourse  must  have.  The 
one  thought  repeated  with  variations  is  the  staple  of 
many  sermons.  Dr.  Chalmers's  discourses  are  largely 
of  this  kind.  They  are  revolving-lights.  Admitting 
the  necessity  of  such  productions,  we  must  offset  it  by 
a  stringent  check  upon  excess  in  the  use  of  them.  Re- 
peat, if  necessary  for  emphasis.  Practice  variations  on 
one  thought,  if  necessary  to  gain  time  for  growth  of 
interest ;  but,  as  soon  as  your  point  is  gained,  drop  it, 
and  pass  on.  By  thus  retrenching  superfluous  mate- 
rials, and  materials  of  secondary  worth,  depending  on 
selection  rather  than  on  volume,  and  saying  only  ne- 
cessary things,  conciseness  of  development  is  achieved 
as  a  matter  of  course.  A  sermon  then  becomes  massive 
and  solid. 

5th,  A  fifth  characteristic  of  a  good  development  is 
order.  Dean  Swift  said  that,  style  is  "  the  right  words 
in  the  right  places."  A  good  development  might  be 
defined  to  be  "the  right  thoughts  in  the  right  places." 
A  reason  always  exists  for  the  location  of  a  thought : 
in  other  words,  there  is  always  a  natural  order  of 
thought.  The  oratorical  instinct  goes  far  to  determine 
this;  but  it  may  be  assisted,  and  at  the  same  time 
obeyed,  by  attention  to  four  very  simple  things. 


^ 


r 


LECT.  XXXI.]    DEVELOPMENT :    CHABACTERISTICS.  451 

(1)  Finish  one  thing  at  a  time.  Say  connsctedly 
all  that  is  to  be  said  on  a  given  thought.  Concentrate 
discourse  long  enough  to  carry  the  point:  and,  once 
carried,  let  it  alone. 

(2)  Aim  deliberately  at  continuity  of  thoaght.  This 
is  a  matter  of  conscious  design.  Every  thought  in  a 
good  discourse  is  a  link  in  a  chain.  Every  thought 
looks  before  and  behind.  It  is  naturally  preceded  and 
naturally  followed.  To  see  this  natural  continuity,  and 
to  execute  it,  must  be  the  voluntary  aim  of  a  speaker. 
Disorderly  speech  is,  very  largely,  unthinking  speech. 

(3)  Avoid  capricious  lines  of  association.     It  is  the        y  > 
infirmity  of  an  undisciplined  mind  that  it  brings  to-     -</ 
gether  the  oddest  and  most  dissimilar  materials.     It 
works  in  tangents,  and  has  no  orbit.     The  instinct  of 

logic,  which  is  in  every  mind,  is  constantly  overruled  by 
hysteric  impulses  which  begin  with  no  aim,  and  end 
nowhere.  It  is  the  prerogative  of  mental  discipline  to 
keep  down  such  anarchic  thinking,  and  to  follow  lines 
of  association  which  are  laws,  and  not  caprices.  I 

(4)  Aim  at  increase  of  intensity  in  the  progress  of     VT^ ^ 
the  development.    Every  vigorous  composition  has  more     ' 

or  less  of  climax  in  the  arrangement  of  its  materials. 
Its  materiafs  intrinsically  are  such  as  to  be  suscepti- 
ble ojLcliDiax.  They  have  gradation  in  their  power  of 
interest  either  to  the  intellect,  or  to  the  sensibilities,  or 
to  both.  There  is  a  much  and  a  more  and  a  most  in 
their  resources  of  impression.  The  oratorical  instinct, 
if  unsophisticated,  will  follow  the  order  of  comparison. 
It  is  assisted,  therefore,  if  a  preacher  asks  and  answers 
for  himself  the  question,  "What  is  the  order  of  in- 
crease in  point  of  intensity  ?  "  Follow  that  order,  and 
you  always  have  the  natural  arrangement,  even  to  the 
location  of  a  word. 


162  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.        [lect.  xxxi 

6th,  The  sixth  characteristic  of  a  good  development, 
and  the  last  which  I  shall  name,  is  proportion. 

(1)  The  development  of  each  division  as  a  whole 
should  be  proportioned  to  that  of  every  other  division. 
In  this  respect,  proportion  should  be  governed  by- 
weight.  Give  the  largest  bulk  to  the  weightiest 
thought.  That  which  is  most  essential  to  the  aim  of 
the  discourse  is  the  weightiest :  necessities  take  preced- 
ence of  luxuries.  Search  out,  therefore,  the  organic 
elements  of  the  discourse,  and  see  to  it  that  they  have 
ample  room  in  which  to  expand.  The  heaviest  argu- 
ments, the  critical  explanations,  the  most  necessary  and 
speaking  illustrations,  the  most  intense  materials  of 
persuasion,  —  give  space  to  these,  and  so  proportion 
the  divisions  which  contain  them,  that  they  shall  not 
be  cramped.  This  is  only  saying,  "  Give  the  largest 
place  to  the  best  things. 

(2)  To  do  this,  it  is  essential  to  begin  with  reserved 
force.  Never  expand  a  first  division  thriftlessly.  Many 
sermons  are  spoiled  by  the  undue  bulk  of  their  first 
divisions.  Because  a  division  is  the  first  (and  perhaps 
with  a  lurking  fear  of  dearth  of  stock)  the  preacher 
inflates  it  beyond  its  relative  worth ;  and  all  that  which 
comes  after  suffers  from  over-crowding.  Military  men 
say  that  an  army  behaves  through  the  battle  as  it  is 
handled  at  first.  So  it  is  with  the  forces  of  speech. 
Begin  warily.  Hold  strength  in  reserve ;  look  to  the 
end ;  and  measure  resources  and  time.  Then  concen- 
trate at  the  vital  points.  Never  fear  poverty  of  thought. 
The  best  things  will  suggest  thought  when  you  come  to 
them  in  the  emergency  of  discussion.  Never  amplify, 
therefore,  at  great  length,  merely  because  amplification 
just  then  and  there  is  easy.  \  Reserve  the  most  robust 
handling  for  the  exigent  materials.      / 


* 


LBCT.  XXXI.]    DEVELOPMENT  :    CHARACTERISTICS.  453 

(3)  The  d^el,ppment  of  each  division  ^  by  itseli 
should  be  proportioned  in  all  its  parts.  On  a  minia- 
ture scale,  a  single  division  is  a  discourse.  It  is  a 
structure  which  has  its  beginning  and  middle  and  end, 
as  an  entire  sermon  has.  A  principle  should  not  be  so 
expanded  as  to  cramp  its  application.  An  argument 
should  not  be  so  amplified  as  to  crowd  into  a  nutshell 
the  thing  which  it  proves.  An  illustration  should  not 
b^  so  dilated  as  to  narrow  to  a  point  the  thing  illus- 
trated./ Explanatory  remarks  should  not  be  so  ex-  . 
tended  as  to  impoverish  the  use  to  be  made  of  themy/ 
Here,  as  before,  begin  warily.  Handle  the  materials 
with  reserve  of  force;  look  to  the  end;  discover  the 
focal  point  of  exigency ;  and  shape  every  thing  so  as  to 
converge  and  concentrate  at  that  point.  Oratorical 
instinct  will  do  all  this,  if  you  keep  it  clear  of  the 
encumbrance  of  languid  thinking  and  heedless  habits 
of  composing.  Perfect  discourse  is  mother-wit  well 
trained,  well  instructed,  and  well  used. 


l^ 


^  ^-'"Tiffidc^ 


J.^^^*^ 


LECTURE   XXXIL 

THE  CONCLUSION :   DEFINITION,  CAUSES  OF   WEAKNESS. 

I.  In  what  respect  is  the  conclusion  of  a  sermon  dis- 
tinct from  the  other  parts  of  it?  This  inquiry  is  an- 
swered, in  part,  by  the  titles  given  to  the  conclusion  in 
the  nomenclature  of  the  pulpit.  In  the  practice  of  the 
older  preachers  we  find  it  under  the  title  of  *■'  uses  "  of 
the  subject  of  discourse.  President  Edwards  and  many 
others  commonly  call  the  conclusion  the  "  application  " 
of  the  subject,  and  of  its  discussion.  Dr.  Emmons  and 
often  Dr.  Finney  term  this  part  of  a  discourse  the 
"improvement"  of  the  subject.  Dr.  Dwight  almost 
invariably  designates  it  by  the  word  "remarks,"  yet 
rarely  by  the  term  "  inferences."  Others  adopt  the 
less  specific  title  of  "  reflections ; "  and  some  propose 
to  conclude  a  sermon  with  "  observations."  This  diver- 
sity of  nomenclature  is  no  evidence  of  indefiniteness 
in  the  conception  of  the  thing.  A  single  element  dis- 
tinguishes every  variety  of  conclusion  technically  so 
called. 

1st,  The  characteristic  idea  of  the  conclusion  is  aj> 
plication  of  the  subject  to  results  in  advance  of  its 
discussion.  President  Edwards  has  the  most  exact  and 
comprehensive  title  for  it.  The  theory  of  the  conclu- 
sion presupposes  a,  theme  discussed,  which  is  now  to 
be  applied  to  something.    It  is  to  be  used  for  a  further 

454 


LfiCT.  KXxn,]     THE  CONCLUSION :   DEFINITION.  465 

purpose.  It  is  to  be  improved  as  an  advantage  gained 
for  a  sequel.  It  is  to  be  reviewed,  for  the  sake  of 
practical  remarks,  observations,  reflections.  It  is  a 
premise  from  which  inferences  are  to  be  drawn.  The 
intense  practicalness  of  a  sermon  is  hinted  in  the  charac- 
teristic idea  of  its  ending.  That  is  not  a  sermon  which 
is  intellectual  discussion  pure  and  simple. 

2d,  It  should  be  observed,  however,  that  this  practi- 
cal application  of  a  subject,  which  we  term  the  "  con- 
clusion," is  not  necessarily  made  to  the  will  of  the 
hearer.  It  may  be  an  application  of  truth  to  any  other 
faculty  of  the  mind.  For  example,  a  truth  discussed 
may  be  used  to  explain  another  truth :  the  fact  of  an 
Atonement  established  discloses  the  nature  of  sin.  A 
truth  discussed  may  be  used,  also,  to  intensify  another 
truth :  the  fact  of  an  Atonement  established  illustrates 
the  love  of  God.  Again :  a  truth  discussed  may  be  used 
to  prove  another  truth:  from  the  doctrine  of  human 
depravity,  that  of  future  retribution  is  an  inference. 
Once  more:  a  truth  proved,  illustrated,  or  explained 
may  be  further  used  as  a  force  of  direct  hortation. 
Here,  only,  in  all  these  varieties  of  application,  is  the 
will  of  the  hearer  directly  approached.  On  the  basis  of 
any  important  truth  of  our  religion,  you  may  legiti- 
mately build  a  direct  appeal. 

A  conclusion,  then,  may  involve  any  or  all  of  the 
radical  processes  of  composition.  It  may  explain,  illus- 
trate, prove,  persuade,  or  all  combined  and  intertwined. 
It  may  be  the  most  complicated  process  in  the  whole 
structure  of  a  sermon.  It  is  susceptible  of  the  most 
varied  and  ingenious  methods  of  procedure.  The  cul- 
mination of  a  preacher's  power  may  often  be  seen  in 
these  few  closing  paragraphs.  Your  utmost  force  of 
character  as  a  man  may  use  here,  unconsciously  to  you, 


456  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.      [oBcr.  xxxn 

your  utmost  skill  as  an  orator  and  the  richest  treasures 
of  your  scholarship.  The  ancient  orators  proved  them- 
selves masters  of  many  of  the  very  same  resources 
which  the  pulpit  needs,  when  they  put  the  supreme 
strain  of  their  personal  force  into  tiie  outpouring  of 
their  perorations. 

3d,  Again:  we  must  observe  that  a  conclusion,  as 
distinct  from  other  parts  of  a  discourse,  is  not  neces- 
sarily restricted  to  the  chronological  termination.  We 
must  tolerate  the  paradox :  the  conclusion  may  be  jther 
than  the  finis  of  a  sermon.  Its  characteristic  idea  is 
not  the  chronological  ending,  but  the  rhetorical  end. 
It  is  the  result  which  the  sermon  is  made  for.  Its  char- 
acteristic idea,  of  application,  permits  its  distribution 
throughout  the  body  of  a  sermon,  in  place  of  its  con- 
centration at  the  close. 

4th,  This  applicatory  portion  of  a  sermon,  wherever 
it  occurs,  is  strikingly  indicative  of  the  intensity  of 
preaching.  Preaching  is  always  for  an  object,  always 
aimed  at  a  practical  result,  never  for  dalliance  with  en- 
tertaining materials.  No  other  part  of  a  sermon  there- 
fore defines  itself  more  positively.  No  matter  if  it  be 
scattered  in  fragments  through  a  discourse,  those  frag- 
ments all  point  one  way :  they  are  all  directed  by  one 
aim.  One  query  tests  them  all.  Are  they  applicatory  of 
the  theme  in  hand,  to  something  in  advance  of  that? 
If  not,  they  have  no  place  where  they  stand :  if  they 
are,  they  are  unlike  all  other  materials  in  the  sermon, 
and  are  identical  in  rhetorical  character  with  each  other. 

As  thus  defined,  the  conclusion  is  obviously  of  prime 
importance  in  a  sermon.  Theoretically,  it  should  seem, 
no  part  of  a  sermon  can  excel  it.  It  may  appear  su- 
perfluous to  argue  this ;  yet  the  history  of  the  pulpit 
gives  great  significance  to  the  inquiry  to  which  we  now 
proceed. 


LKOT.  xxxn.]    CONCLUSION :   CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS.       457 

II.  What  are  the  most  disastrous  drawbacks  to  the 
applicatory  power  in  preaching  ? 

1st,  You  anticipate  me  in  naming,  as  the  most  obvi 
ous  yet  the  most  effective  of  these,  the  want  of  spirit- 
ual consecration  in  the  preacher. 

(1)  Here  the  fact  is  fundamental,  that,  when  we 
demand  of  a  preacher  that  he  be  an  eminently  holy 
man,  we  only  affirm  in  religious  dialect  one  of  the  first 
principles  of  oratorical  science.  Eloquence  in  all  its 
forms  is  built  on,  or  more  significantly  is  built  in,  in- 
tense character  in  the  man.  This  is  as  fundamental 
to  secular  as  to  sacred  eloquence.  No  man  can  be  elo- 
quent in  any  thing,  who  has  not,  quoad  hoc,  an  intense 
working  of  his  own  character.  His  personal  intelli- 
gence, his  personal  faith,  his  personal  consciousness  of 
an  object,  the  utmost  strain  of  his  will-power  are  the 
vitalizing  forces.  Not  adroitness  in  command  of  lan- 
guage, not  zeal  in  the  form  of  paroxysm,  but  the  char- 
acter of  the  man,  in  an  intense  unity  of  purpose,  is  the 
soul  of  speech  in  those  lofty  forms  of  it  which  we  dig- 
nify as  oratory.  Therefore,  in  a  teacher  of  religion,  the 
force  of  speech  is  weakened  by  any  thing  which  debili- 
tates religious  character,  or  suspends  its  working  to  the 
purpose  in  hand.  A  type  of  religious  experience  which 
deadens  a  preacher's  personal  faith  in  the  truth  he 
preaches  may  create  a  paralysis  equivalent  to  that  of 
downright  unbelief.  Theatrical  working  has  even  less 
force  in  the  pulpit  than  in  secular  address. 

(2)  Hence  we  find,  as  we  might  reasonably  expect 
to  find,  that,  in  the  experience  of  the  pulpit,  the  most 
vital  changes  for  good  have  been  spiritual  changes  in 
the  men  who  have  administered  its  utterances.  "  Re- 
store unto  me  the  joy  of  thy  salvation;  .  .  .  and 
dnners  shall  be   converted."     The  penitent   Psalmist 


468  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       [T.i.<Tt.  xxia 

here  declares  the  law  of  all  eminent  success  in  the 
preaching  of  the  gospel.  An  uplifting  from  a  lower  to 
a  higher  plane  of  religious  life  is  sure  to  declare  itself 
in  a  reduplication  of  power.  The  vital  power  in  the 
preacher  is  the  vitalizing  power  to  the  hearer.  This  is 
one  of  the  most  invariable  of  the  discovered  laws  in 
the  working  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

Yet  in  the  pressure  and  ferment  of  ministerial  duty, 
involving  as  it  does  the  interplay  of  complicated  mo- 
tives, a  sore  temptation  is  encountered  to  be  forgetful 
of  this  principle,  and  to  work  with  the  full  machinery 
of  intellectual  industry  in  motion,  with  little  or  no  care 
for  spiritual  conditions.  Preaching  is,  intellectually,  a 
work  of  great  severity.  Taking  its  continuity  into  ac- 
count, no  other  professional  labor,  year  in  and  year  out, 
equals  it.  It  is  a  marvelous  absorbent  of  the  mental 
forces.  Said  Dr.  James  Alexander  on  a  certain  occa- 
sion, "  The  last  sermon  I  wrote  is  the  least  evangelical 
I  ever  wrote.  Yet  this  did  not  once  enter  into  my 
head  till  I  had  finished."  The  intellectual  force  of 
the  preacher  had  so  overpowered  the  spiritual  force 
of  the  man,  that  he  could  compose  a  sermon  of  feeble 
evangelical  spirit  without  knowing  it. 

Turn,  for  illustration  of  this  law,  to  the  memoirs  of 
Chalmers,  of  Robert  Hall,  of  Doddridge,  of  Norman 
McLeod.  Revolutionary  changes  in  the  pulpits  of  these 
men  were  consequent  upon  religious  changes  in  the 
men.  Those  improvements  in  the  men  deserve  study. 
They  were  significant  of  a  first  principle  in  the  history 
of  the  pulpit.  Specially  were  they  no  superficial  incre- 
ments of  feeling.  They  were  not  ebullitions  of  zeal 
consequent  upon  temporary  exigencies.  They  were 
not  meteoric  excitements  produced  by  the  force  of 
sympathy.     They  were  permanent  growths  in  sanctified 


UEOT.  xxxn.]    CONCLUSION:   CAUSES  OP  WEAKl^ESS.       469 

character.  For  the  most  part,  they  developed  them- 
selves in  retirement.  Chalmers  encountered  the  deci- 
sive change  in  his  mini»try  in  the  stillness  of  Kilmany. 
His  humble  cottagers  found  it  out  before  hs  did.  The 
fruit  of  such  elemental  changes  is  godliness  in  its  ety- 
mological sense  of  godlikeness.  Serene  it  may  be,  lika 
the  sensibility  of  an  Infinite  Mind.  A  fire  in  the  soul 
it  is,  but  a  fire  without  crackling  or  flame,  —  the  coLcen-  ^ 
trated  and  still  heat  of  a  bed  of  kindled  anthracite. 

(3)  One  sequence  of  such  sanctified  growth  often  is  f  I 
the  creation  of  an  adroit  instinct  of  persuasion.  Per-  ^ 
haps  thinking  less,  and  caring  less,  than  ever  before 
about  oratorical  art,  the  man  becomes  inspired  with  an 
unconscious  oratorical  genius.  He  becomes  a  living 
power  in  the  pulpit,  without  knowing  it.  By  that  which 
seems  an  inborn  tact,  like  the  swing  of  the  right  arm, 

he  finds  his  way  to  hearts.  He  becomes  inexhaustibly 
inventive  of  means  and  methods  and  auxiliaries  of  suc- 
cess. ^      ^       j 

(4)  Another  phenomenon  of  that  preaching  which  is  j^ 
distinguished  by  the  intensity  of  its  applicatory  force  y 
is  a  singular  elevation,  which  imparts  to  it  devotional 
power.  Are  there  not  certain  portions  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, not  devotional  in  form,  which  are  so  in  their  pro- 
foundest  impression  upon  us?  We  find  them  to  be 
devotional  helps.     Their  themes  are  so  lofty,  their  range 

of  thought  is  so  elevated  yet  so  simple,  their  emotive 
fervor  is  so  concentrated  yet  so  tranquil,  that  in  tha 
reading  the  mind  rises  Godward  intuitively.  Portions 
of  the  Epistles  are  of  this  character.  Pre-eminently 
such  are  the  discourses  of  our  Lord.  The  line  which 
separates  them  from  prayer  is  scarcely  felt  by  one  whose 
mind  is  lifted  into  full  sympathy  with  them.  The 
reader  may  naturally  reverse  them,  and  utter  them  ia 
devout  address  to  their  author. 


460  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       [leot. 

Why  has  the  Church  for  ages  chanted  the  Apostles 
Creed  as  an  act  of  worship?  It  was  the  opinion  of  Dr. 
Arnold,  that  "  creeds  in  public  worship  should  be  used 
as  triumphant  hymns  of  thanksgiving."  That  such 
things  as  our  creeds  affirm  are  true  is  the  joy  of  right- 
minded  being  throughout  the  universe.  The  songs  of 
heaven,  of  which  the  Scriptures  give  us  a  distant  echo, 
seem  to  be  chiefly  affirmations  of  some  of  the  funda- 
mental doctrines  of  our  faith.  The  same  liturgic  strain 
is  discernible  in  the  most  godly  preaching.  Certain 
sermons,  of  most  intense  appeal  to  human  hearers,  still 
read  like  words  of  communion  with  God.  Some  of 
Archbishop  Leighton's  discourses  are  of  this  godly  cast. 
Some  passages  in  the  sermons  of  Frederick  Robertson 
are  of  the  same  order.  This  is  the  most  divine  ideal  of 
Christian  preaching. 

(5)  In  my  judgment,  some  of  the  marvels  recorded 
of  the  success  of  single  sermons  in  the  salvation  of 
hearers  are  due  to  this  exaltation  of  the  work  of  the 
preacher  into  the  atmosphere  of  the  Divine  Mind.  It 
is  God  who  seems  to  speak.  On  the  wings  of  Ijs  sug- 
gestions, men  rise  into  converse  with  him.  When  the 
Rev.  John  Livingstone,  for  instance,  was  instrumental 
in  the  awakening  of  five  hundred  hearers  by  one  dis- 
course, I  suspect  that  his  preaching  was  uplifted  by  the 
personal  godliness  of  the  man  into  the  atmosphere  of 
devotion.  He  became,  for  the  time,  an  instrument  on 
which  the  Spirit  of  God  moved  without  hindrance. 

We  are  told  that  "the^chariojts.  of  God  are  thousands 
of  angels."  Among  the  mysteries  of  the  divine  life,  it 
may  be  that  God  does  in  person  move  in  the  persons  of 
his  instruments.  Their  words  are  first  his  words ;  theii 
thoughts  his ;  their  persuasions  the  direct  movement  of 
his  will ;  and  their  work  in  preaching  therefore  becomes 


m 


p^-^  1^.  ''' 


user.  xxxn.J    CONCLUSION  :    CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS.       461 

his  work,  and  the  result  of  it  is  his  decree.  Hence 
come  the  miracles  of  their  success.  This  intensity  of 
personal  holiness  in  the  preacher  distinguishes  the 
periods  of  grandest  spiritual  success  in  the  pulpit.  The 
want  of  it,  specially  the  opposite  to  it,  is  the  fatal  dis- 
ease which  makes  many  an  able  pulpit  lifeless. 

(6)  You  are  too  familiar  with  these  views,  to  render 
necessary  further  enlargement  upon  them  here.  Yet, 
rhetorically  considered,  this  is  the  root  of  the  whole 
matter  before  us.  It  is  no  peculiarity  of  preaching, 
growing  out  of  the  sacredness  of  the  work.  It  is  only 
a  development,  in  the  forms  of  religious  speech,  of  the 
fundamental  principle  of  eloquence  in  all  speech.  The 
character  is  the  speech :  the  man  is  the  speech.  That 
aim  at  the  practical  successes  of  the  pulpit  which 
springs  from  godlikeness  of  character  in  the  man  will 
often  seem  to  scholarly  criticism  to  be  the  work,  the 
wisdom,  the  adroitness,  the  inspiration  of  genius, 
threading  its  way  through  the  sinuosities  of  oratorical 
art.  Yet  oratorical  art  is  the  last  thing  the  man  cares 
for  or  thinks  of. 

(7)  I  have  remarked  that-  any  thing  which  deadens 
a  preacher's  personal  faith  in  the  truths  he  preaches 
must  tend  to  create  a  paralysis  of  applicatory  force 
equivalent  to  that  which  springs  from  downright  un- 
belief. It  deserves  to  be  here  noted  that  this  is  spe- 
cially tru^  of  the  doctrine  of  retribution.  To  this 
docstrine  the  pulpit  sustains  a  peculiar  relation.  Not 
that  it  is  more  sharply  representative  than  others  of 
the  Christian  system:  in  some  respects  it  is  inferior 
to  others  in  applicatory  power.  The  motive-power  de- 
rived from  it  is  less  profound  and  less  permanent  than 
that  derived  from  the  more  amiable  aspects  of  our  the- 
ology.   But  the  peculiarity  of  the  doctrine  of  retribu- 


462  THE  THEORY  Oi"  PREACHING.       [i^crr. 

tion  is,  that,  as  related  to  the  ministrations  of  the 
pulpit,  it  stands  first  in  the  order  of  time.  As  the 
exponent  to  a  preacher  of  the  state  in  which  the  gospel 
finds  men,  it  stands  in  the  forefront  of  all  theology. 
Other  views  come  to  life  in  a  preacher's  experience  sub- 
sequently, which  are  more  far-reaching  than  this ;  but 
this  is  the  alphabet  of  them  all.  In  their  fullness  they 
all  depend  on  this. 

I  have  elsewhere  spoken  of  the  quadrilateral  of  doc- 
trines in  Christian  theology,  each  one  of  which  supports 
the  rest ;  viz.,  the  doctrines  of  depravity,  of  atonement, 
of  regeneration,  and  of  retribution.  These  are  the 
elemental  forces  in  the  faith  of  a  preacher.  In  homi- 
letic  use  they  illustrate,  enforce,  measure,  and  intensify 
each  other.  The  proportions  of  each  define  the  propor- 
tions of  the  others.  The  degree  of  faith  which  real- 
izes one  of  them  to  a  preacher's  mind  will  affect  his 
working  faith  in  all  the  rest.  They  are  all  of  them 
elements  of  an  intense  theology.  Yet,  of  these  four, 
the  doctrine  of  retribution,  indicative  as  it  is  of  the 
peril  in  which  the  gospel  finds  men,  and  being,  there- 
fore, the  first  which  naturally  realizes  itself  to  the  faith 
of  a  preacher,  will  inevitably  stand  foremost  in  giving 
character  to  his  experience  of  the  rest.  Lower  the 
tone  of  his  faith  in  this  doctrine,  either  by  secret  intel- 
lectual doubts,  or  by  moral  insensibility,  and  the  rest 
must  sink  proportionately.  Sooner  or  later,  the  whole 
interior  life  of  the  pulpit  must  be  what  the  preacher's 
faith  is  in  this  one  of  its  elemental  forces. 

You  will  find  it  to  be  thus  in  your  own  homiletio 
development.  The  sense  of  laboring  in  a  great  emer- 
gency will  brood  over  your  pulpit  at  the  very  birth  of 
a  Christlike  experience  within  you.  The  gathering  and 
ooncentration  of  perils,  the  ripening  of  an  infinite  crisis, 


c^CT.  xxxn.J    CONCLUSION :    CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS.       463 

the  threatenhxg  of  an  unspeakable  woe,  the  overshad- 
owing  of  the  critical  and  ultimate  exigency  of  proba 
tion,  —  these  are  the  phases  of  truth  which  will  first 
become  real  to  you,  and  which  will  measure  the  inten- 
sity of  all  that  comes  after  in  the  experience  of  your 
mission  as  a  Christian  preacher.  Let  your  experience 
at  this  point  be  sterile,  and  all  that  follows  in  the 
natural  order  of  spiritual  growth  will  be  sterile  also. 

The  principle  involved  in  this  view  explains  the  fact, 
and  is  also  strikingly  illustrated  by  the  fact,  that  unbe- 
lievers in  the  doctrine  of  future  punishment  are  never 
on  any  very  large  scale  efficient  supporters  of  Christian 
missions.  Why  is  this?  The  reason  is  simply  that 
they  do  not  believe,  as  others  do,  that  this  is  a  lost 
world.  Not  believing  this  elementary  fact  of  the  situa- 
tion, they  unconsciously  lower  the  whole  redemptive 
work  to  the  level  and  to  the  temperature  of  that  nega- 
tive. On  the  same  principle  is  it  that  life  dies  out  of 
the  ministry  of  an  individual  who  attempts  to  preach 
with  no  heart  in  his  faith  in  this  doctrine,  and  therefore 
with  no  vivid  conceptions  of  his  audience  as  an  assem- 
bly of  lost  souls. 

(8)  This  train  of  thought  suggests,  further,  that  the 
doctrine  of  retribution,  when  held  as  the  creed  of  the 
head,  and  not  the  faith  of  the  heart,  tends  to  create 
a  recoil  in  the  popular  mind,  proportioned  to  the  in- 
tensity of  the  truth  itself.  Some  ti'uths,  by  a  belief 
without  corresponding  sensibility  in  the  believer,  are 
transformed  into  prodigies  of  falsehood  in  the  view  of 
sensitive  hearers.  To  the  common  sense  of  men,  to 
believe  certain  dogmas,  and  not  to  feel  them,  is  proof 
incontestable,  either  that  the  dogmas  themselves  are  a 
monstrous  delusion,  or  the  believer  is  a  monster  in 
character.    Then,  inasmuch  as  ^he  man,  in  such  a  case^ 


164  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.      .lbct.  xxxn 

is  commonly  as  amiable  in  his  instincts  as  the  average 
of  men,  the  looker-on  takes  the  other  horn  of  the 
dilemma,  and  finds  the  monster  in  the  dogma. 

The  faith  of  the  Church  is,  in  its  nature,  an  intense 
faith.  Belief  of  it  tends  to  create  intense  character :  it 
evokes  intense  sensibilities,  intense  activities,  an  intense 
consecration.  A  cool  intellectual  acceptance  of  it, 
which  is  only  that,  is  demoniacal.  But  its  believers  are 
not  demons.  Therefore  it  is  the  faith  that  is  wrong ; 
that  is  a  terrific  dream.  It  is  a  nightmare  of  ascetic 
piety,  which  should  command  no  trust,  but  abhorrence 
rather,  proportioned  to  the  claims  which  the  falsehood 
asserts.  The  more  intense  it  is,  the  more  odious  it  is, 
because  it  is  the  intensity  of  a  malign  creed,  which 
none  but  a  satanic  mind  could  have  breathed  into  life. 
Such  is  the  instinctive  reasoning  of  men  upon  such  a 
faith,  when  it  is  falsified  by  the  character  of  the  be- 
liever. Let  that  believer  be  the  occupant  of  the  pulpit, 
and  he  may  create  many  infidels  in  the  effort  to  save 
one.  No  more  fatal  catastrophe  can  overwhelm  his 
ministry  than  the  possession  of  this  creed  of  the  intel- 
lect without  the  faith  of  the  heart. 

So  overpowering  is  this  drift  of  the  popular  logic  on 
ihe  subject,  that  even  the  necessary  reasonings  of  good 
men  in  defense  of  their  faith  are  often  denounced  as 
maMgn.  It  is  perilous  to  put  into  print  the  argument 
for  certain  doctrines ;  they  need  the  human  voice,  eye, 
tone,  gesture,  to  carry  the  impression  of  a  faith  as  dis 
tinct  from  a  creed.  The  frame-work  of  the  doctrine 
needs  to  be  weighted  with  the  character  of  the  man. 
For  the  proof  of  eternal  punishment  especiall;  s  oral  ad- 
dress is  superior  to  the  press.  Even  President  Edwards, 
one  of  the  most  saintly  of  men,  is  criticised  by  Matthew 
Arnold  as  a  man  of  merciless  temperament,  because  he 


LBCT.  xxxn.]    CONCLUSION:    CAUSES  OP  WEAKNESS.      466 

has  left  on  record  a  cool  logical  defense  of  the  Calvin- 
istic  theology.  His  sermon  entitled  "Sinners  in  the 
hands  of  an  angry  God,"  he  could  preach  at  Enfield  to 
a  crowd  of  awestruck  and  broken-hearted  listeners; 
but  that  sermon  in  print  has  often  been  denounced  as 
heartless  and  malign. 

A  melancholy  illustration  of  this  view,  followed  by 
most  disastrous  consequences,  is  yet  fresh  in  the  eccle- 
siastical history  of  New  England.  In  the  memoir  of 
the  Rev.  Dr.  Channing,jmd  in  certain  other  memo- 
randa of  his  life,  it  IS  recorded  that  in  his  youth  he  was 
once  taken  by  his  father  to  hear  a  celebrated  preacher 
of  the  orthodox  school  of  theology.  The  boy  was  in  a 
state  of  sensitive  religious  inquiry.  He  had  naturally 
an  ascetic  temperament.  In  subsequent  life  he  im- 
paired his  health  by  extreme  vigils  and  fasting.  On 
the  occasion  referred  to,  he  listened  in  awe  to  the 
representation  the  preacher  gave  of  man's  lost  state, 
and  his  exposure  to  eternal  woe.  The  only  hope  held 
out  to  him  was  his  helpless  dependence  on  sovereign 
grace.  The  sermon  seemed  to  him  to  throw  a  pall 
over  the  whole  world.  He  left  the  church  in  speechless 
consternation.  His  soul  was  panic-struck  in  dread  of 
what  should  come  next.  Who  the  preacher  was,  it  is 
not  said.  He  may  have  been  a  godly  man,  who  preached 
in  all  sincerity  the  theology  of  the  time.  He  may  have 
been  the  Rev.  Dr.  Hopkins,  who  was  a  pastor  in  Chan- 
ning's  birthplace.  But,  whoever  he  was,  there  was  a 
huge  gap  between  the  demonstrative  sensibilities  of  the 
man,  and  those  of  the  tender  child  among  his  hearers. 
To  the  boy  the  sermon  seemed  as  one  of  the  "  rocks  and 
the  mountains  "  that  should  fall  upon  a  doomed  sinner. 
He  waited  for  his  father  to  speak  to  him  of  the  ghastly 
doom  before  him.     They  stepped  into  the  carriage,  and 


i66  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       [lect.  xxxa 

rode  liome  in  silence.  He  felt  himself  to  be  on  the 
threshold  of  hell.  Presently  his  father  began  to  w'listle, 
and,  on  entering  the  house,  he  called  for  his  slippers. 
and  sat  down  to  read  the  newspapers.  How  natural 
was  the  child's  notice  of  the  little  incidents  of  the  ride 
and  the  coining  home !  Thus  he  reasoned :  "  If  the 
fearful  tidings  I  have  heard  from  the  eternal  world  are 
true,  how  can  a  sane  man  whistle,  or  think  of  his  slip- 
pers, or  open  a  newspaper?"  To  a  child's  mind  the 
inference  was  irresistible :  "  The  fearful  dogma  is  not 

true.     My  father  does  not  believe  it.     Deacon  B 

does  not  believe  it.  The  preacher  did  not  believe  it 
Nobody  believes  it,  and  nobody  can."  He  felt  that  he 
had  been  trifled  with.  The  preacher  had  tortured  his 
childish  ignorance  by  a  theologic  bugbear.  It  may  bci 
that  on  that  memorable  afternoon  American  Unitarian- 
ism  was  born. 

I  will  not  paijse  now  to  analyze  the  moral  infl  lences 
there  at  work ;  but  so  much  as  this  is  clear,  thut  the 
youthful  hearer  of  the  gospel  needed  to  have  such  a 
faith  enveloped  in  the  sensibilities  of  a  warm  hnman 
heart.  He  needed  to  receive  it  from  the  inmost  soul  of 
the  preacher,  tremulous  with  desire  to  save  the  souls 
of  hearers.  He  needed  to  be  made  to  feel  that  the  doc- 
trine of  retribution  is  one  which  can  be  held  and  is 
held  by  benignant  though  awestruck  believers.  Can 
you  not  conceive  of  a  method  of  bringing  that  doctrine^ 
and  others  cognate  with  it,  home  to  the  conscience 
even  of  that  monastic  boy,  which  should  have  corn- 
manded  his  trust,  and  not  merely  his  horror  ?  And,  if 
such  had  been  the  fact,  who  can  say  that  the  moral 
history  of  thousands  might  not  have  been  affected  be- 
nignly by  that  one  sermon  to  that  one  ihild  ? 

We  must  measure  the  intense  theology  of  that  age, 


LBOT.  xxxn.J    CONCLUSION  :    CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS.       467 

and  the  disproportioned  development  in-  it  of  the 
sterner  aspects  of  our  faith,  in  order  to  understand  Dr 
Channing's  inextinguishable  hatred  of  the  Calvinistic 
theology.  As  he  had  received  it,  it  had  appeared  to 
bring  him  and  all  mankind  down  to  the  open  gates  of 
hell,  and  to  leave  them  there.  At  its  bidding  he  had 
looked  in  upon  the  lake  of  fire.  The  only  rescue  which 
was  made  real  to  his  conceptions,  and  possible  to  his 
logic,  was  to  fling  the  delusion  from  him  as  a  demo- 
niacal invention.  Thus  he  ever  afterwards,  in  his 
public  ministry,  caricatured  the  orthodox  faith.  After 
the  experience  of  his  childhood,  under  the  preaching  of 
that  age,  his  intense  mind  could  conceive  of  it  in  no 
other  way.  The  Calvinistic  Deity  was  to  him  a  malign 
being.  Retribution  was  the  anger,  the  wrath,  the  fury, 
the  rage  of  a  satanic  mind.  The  Atonement  was  a 
device  of  demoniacal  torture.  The  cross  he  called  the 
"central  scaffold  of  the  universe."  We  must  always 
expect  to  find  the  hostility  of  profound  natures  to  our 
faith  proportioned  to  the  intrinsic  intensity  of  it,  if  we 
permit  it  to  reach  them  from  the  pulpit,  as  a  creed  of 
the  intellect  only,  not  humanized  by  the  sensibilities 
of  a  soul  behind  it. 

(9)  Further:  it  deserves  emphatic  notice  that  the 
spiritual  element  here  claimed  as  requisite  to  the 
preaching  of  an  intense  theology  can  not  be  success- 
fully  imitated.  Character  in  any  thing  can  not  be 
mutated  with  success  in  the  long  run;  but  nowhere 
else  is  a  moral  counterfeit  so  sure  to  be  detected  as  in 
the  pulpit.  Even  with  honest  purpose,  with  desire  to 
save  souls,  a  preacher  can  not  put  on  the  signs  of 
moral  earnestness  with  any  reasonable  hope  that  they 
will  beguile  the  people  into  subjection  to  the  genuine 
thing.     Not  only  is  it  true  that  God  is  not  mocked,  but 


468  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       [lbct.  xxxn 

the  people  ^re  not  mocked.  There  is  a  subtle  some' 
thing  whic>i  is  beyond  all  art ;  art  can  neither  imitate  it, 
nor  conceal  ihe  absence  of  it. 

Science  tells  us  that  chemical  analysis  can  reduce  a 
diamond  bo  the  same  elements  as  those  of  charcoal, 
with  such  exact  similitude,  that  the  difference  is  less 
than  one  fifty-thousandth  part  of  the  diamond's  weight. 
Yet  never  was  the  chemist  born  who  could  create  a 
diamond.  So  homiletic  art  may  conspire  with  an  hon- 
est purpose  to  do  good  in  imitating  the  exterior  of 
a  godly  character  in  thought,  in  speech,  in  action,  so 
exactly,  that  homiletic  criticism  can  not  detect  the 
difference  between  the  original  and  the  copy.  Yet  the 
moral  matinct  of  hearers  will  detect  it.  Even  con- 
science can  not  make  a  godly  preacher.  The  spirit 
ansvr/!rs  <^ly  tD  the  spirit.  To  every  thing  else  souls 
are  ii-  lai?)]. 


&:dA 


(8^.uL^ 


LECTURE  XXXIII. 

THE  CONCLUSION:   CAUSES   OP   WEAKNESS. 

2d,  The  spiritual  experience  considered  in  the  pre- 
ceding lecture  may  in  some  degree  exist,  and  yet  the 
applicatory  power  of  sermons  may  receive  a  drawback 
from  a  second  cause;  that  is,  an  inordinate  estimate 
of  the  intellectual,  as  distinct  from  the  emotive  and 
the  executive  effects  of  preaching.  The  sermons  of 
Bisho^_Bjltler  are  the  best  of  their  kind  in  English 
liferature.  As  literary  models  they  are  standards.  One 
turns  to  them,  sure  of  finding  in  them  intellectual 
stimulus  and  refreshment.  Yet  they  are  deficient  in  a 
certain  quality  to  which  the  French  pulpit  has  given 
a  name,  —  onction.  What  is  unction  in  preaching  ?  It 
is  thought  so  clothed  in  emotion  as  itself  to  reproduce 
emotion. 

(1)  The  English  temperament,  and,  to  a  less  extent, 
our  American  temperament  are  not  friendly  to  this 
quality.  That  which  in  legislative  debate  corresponds 
to  unction  in  the  pulpit  would  be  met  with  the  derisive 
"  Hear,  Hear  I"  in  the  House  of  Commons.  Unimpas- 
sioned  intellect  talking  to  intellects  as  cool  as  itself  is 
the  English  ideal  of  a  parliamentary  speaker.  Among 
the  most  orthodox  divines  of  the  English  Church, 
accordingly,  one  often  finds  an  over-growth  of  the  di 
dactic  element,  replete  with  common  sense,  but  shrink 


470  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,      [lbot.  xxxm. 

ing  from  close  analytic  applications  of  truth  to  the 
conscience  in  tb^^  forms  of  direct  appeal. 

(2)  Any  one  who  is  familiar  with  the  literature  of 
the  English  pulpit,  especially  in  unpublished  form, 
must  have  observed  the  fact,  also,  that  an  over-estimate 
of  the  intellectual  processes  in  preaching  does  not  by 
any  means  necessitate  the  most  profound  intellectual 
pioducts  in  the  construction  of  sermons.  On  the  con- 
trary it  may,  and  in  the  English  pulpit  it  often  does, 
result  in  the  most  lifeless  of  dead  levels  as  it  respects 
original  thinking.  The  modern  Established  pulpit  of 
England,  abstracting  from  it  perhaps  three  men,  has 
scarcely  a  scintillation  of  originality. 

If  one  may  judge  from  the  tone  of  criticism  indulged 
by  the  secular  press  of  England,  the  educated  laymen 
of  the  Church  no  longer  look  there  for  the  power  of 
their  clergy.  They  no  longer  look  to  the  pulpit  as  an 
authority,  as  the  creator  of  popular  opinion,  even  in 
matters  of  religion.  They  do  not  hesitate  to  contrast, 
in  this  respect,  the  present  decline  of  their  pulpit  with 
its  splendid  history.  The  effective  labor  of  the  Estab- 
lished clergy  is  now  in  the  pastoral  routine  of  the  parish, 
wherever  it  is  felt  as  a  social  power.  There,  I  think, 
a  more  perfect  ideal  may  be  found  of  a  Christian  pastoi 
than  has  ever  been  generally  realized  in  this  country. 
It  lives  yet  as  an  inheritance  from  a  past  age,  when 
Jeremy  Taylor  did  not  think  it  beneath  him  to  minister 
*  io  th^ottagers  of  Golden  Grove,  numbering,  probably, 
lieldom,  if  ever,  one  hundred  souls.  Nowhere  in  Protes- 
tant Christendom  has  a  finer  conception  of  a  Christian 
pastor  been  realized  than  that  of  the  old  parish  priest 
of  England.  To  tliis  day,  we  all  turn,  for  refreshment 
in  the  despised  toils  of  the  pastoral  office,  to  George 
Herbert's  "  Coimtry  Parson." 


LBCT.  xxxiii.]     CONCLUSION :    CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS      471 

In  this  country  the  fact  is  a  lamentable  one,  that,  in 
all  denominations,  pastoral  visitation  has  declined.  In 
many  cases,  even  the  visitation  of  the  sick,  which,  by 
the  rules  of  the  Church  of  England,  is  an  indispensable 
and  most  sacred  portion  of  the  pastoral  routine,  is  very 
inefficiently  conducted.  The  administration  of  charity 
to  the  poor,  a  most  potent  auxiliary  to  pastoral  influ- 
ence, has  almost  wholly  passed  out  of  clerical  hands. 

(3)  T>n>  flppliTiP  of  pnfitnrni  duty  is  exerting  a  debil- 
itating influence  on  the  spiritual  power  of  our  pulpits. 
Among  many  oFthe  clergy  of  the  Church  of  England 
the  ancient  pastoral  spirit  is  still  rife.  I  have  been 
told,  by  those  who  had  the  means  of  information  on 
the  subject,  that  rectors  and  curates,  in  large  numbers, 
are  still  found  performing  pastoral  duty  with  heroic 
fidelity  in  the  rural  districts  and  the  manufacturing 
towns  of  England,  and  in  portions  of  London  where  no 
man  respectably  clothed,  except  a  clergyman,  can  go 
with  safety  without  the  protection  of  the  police.  But 
these  are  men  who  are  never  heard,  or  heard  of,  in  the 
pulpit,  outside  of  their  own  parish  precincts.  Speaking 
in  the  general,  therefore,  it  is  fair  to  affirm  that  the 
power  of  the  English  clergy  has  passed  out  of  the  pul- 
pit with  no  present  prospect  of  revival  there. 

(4)  Quietism  of  the  intellect  sometimes  takes  a  form 
still  more  objectionable,  because  more  heartless.  It  is 
that  tyranny  of  an  effeminate  taste  in  the  pulpit,  which 
rejects  pungent  applications  of  truth  to  the  consciences 
of  liearers,  as'b"eing  incongruous  with  the  wants  and 
prerogatives  of  refined  society.  The  fidelity  of  John 
Knox  to  Queen  Mary  is,  in  the  judgment  of  such  a 
taste,  a  rudeness  which  the  Presbyterian  Church  of 
Scotland  and  of  this  country  has  inherited  in  the  habit 
of  its  ministry  in  individualizing  hearers,  and  adjusting 


472  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.      [UBOT.  xxxuc 

applications  of  truth  to  character.  To  such  an  emas* 
culated  criticism  the  pulpit  has  ceased  to  be  a  powei 
of  reproof.  Religion  has  become  a  sentiment.  Reviv- 
als are  germane  only  to  uncultivated  zeal.  An 
athletic  theology  has  become  only  historic.  Modern 
refinement  neither  craves  it,  nor  needs  it.  The  doctrine 
of  an  eternal  retribution,  with  its  cognate  themes,  is 
out  of  place  in  a  pulpit  which  is  to  address  itself  to  the 
^^     tastes  of  gentlemen. 

The  spirit  of  this  type  of  clerical  character  pervades 
the  atmosphere  of  culture  everywhere  in  large  cities. 
Minds  which  are  braced  against  it,  for  the  most  part,  by 
the  inheritance  of  a  robust  theology  and  a  zealous 
pulpit,  may  still  be  beguiled  into  some  degree  of  sym- 
pathy with  it ;  and  that  sympathy,  without  approving 
such  a  spirit,  may  still  tempt  a  preacher  to  evade  the 
discomfort,  perhaps  the  peril,  of  shocking  it  by  an 
unexpected  directness,  and  an  unfashionable  fidelity  of 
appeal  or  of  reproof. 

3d,  Intimately  allied  with  the  foregoing,  we  find  a 
third  cause  of  dilution  of  the  applicatory  force  of 
preaching,  in  a  morbid  fear  of  fanaticism.  The  reli- 
gious weaknesses  are  rery  few  which  sap  the  strength 
of  the  pulpit  more  insidiously  yet  more  fatally  than 
this.  It  is  not  easy  to  decide  which  is  the  more  disas- 
trous to  a  preacher's  power  over  the  consciences  of 
men,  —  to  be  a  fanatic,  or  to  preach  in  servile  fear  of 
being  one.  The  following  points  deserve  especial  men- 
tion. 

(1)  The  perils  of  the  large  majority  of  educated 
preachers  are  not  in  the  direction  of  fanaticism,  but  in 
that  of  a  servile  fear  of  fanaticism.  Culture  itself  is  a 
breakwater  against  fanatical  surges.  Its  danger  is 
that  of  becoming  a  barrier  to  the  inflow  of  rational 


\  ^ 


LBCT.  xxxm.]     CONCLUSION:    CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS.     473 

enthusiasm.  History  shows  that  genuine  fanatics  in 
the  pulpit  have  been  comparatively  few,  —  not  so  nu- 
merous by  a  vast  reckoning  as  those  who  have  been 
ferocious  denouncers  of  fanaticism.  (The  weaklings 
who  have  succumbed  to  their  dread  of  an  intemperate 
pulpit  by  making  their  own  pulpit  stupid  have  been  as 
tlie  stars  in  multitude,  y' 

(2)  Every  revival  of  religion  which  has  been  exten- 
sive and  powerful  enough  to  become  a  landmark  in 
history  has  found  a  certain  proportion  of  the  clergy  in 
opposition  to  it,  through  their  fear  of  fanatical  distor- 
tions. Good  men  have  been  swept,  by  the  current  of 
antipathy  to  fanaticism,  into  the  ranks  of  worldly  hos- 
tility to  every  "  great  awakening."  Pulpits  have  been 
closed,  sometimes  barricaded,  against  the  eminent  in- 
struments of  the  awakening,  as  were  many  metropolitan 
pulpits  of  this  country  against  Whitefield.  Sermons 
by  the  thousands  have  been  palsied  in  their  applicatory 
force  by  the  shock  of  recoil  from  fanatic  vagaries. 
They  have  lost  applicatory  invention,  and  become 
stilted.  The  men  who  have  preached  them  have  fallen 
into  professional  routine.  They  have  sunk  under  the 
disease,  which,  above  all  others,  is  most  fatal  to  a  regen- 
erate ministry.  The  phenomenon  is  not  infrequent, 
that  the  very  men  who  have  been  instrumental  in 
awakening  the  popular  mind  in  a  revival  have  become 
the  most  inveterate  opposers  of  the  movement  which 
they  originated.  The  beginning  and  the  ending  of  a 
man's  ministry  have  often  been  in  sad  contrast  to  each 
other  in  their  spiritual  affinities. 

(3)  The  most  destructive  disease  of  the  ministry,  to 
which  I  allude,  is  satisfaction  with  other  successes  than 
those  of  saving  souls,  and  building  up  a  sanctified 
church.     Nothing  else  equals  this  in  its  power  to  under 


i74  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,      [lect.  xxxm. 

mine  an  evangelical   pulpit.     Let  a  preacher   content 
himself  with  literary  success,  in  writing  and  publishing 
sermons  which  may  become  standards  of  literary  taste ; 
or  with  social  success,  in  building  up  a  chui'ch,  which, 
by  its  culture,  its  numbers,  its  wealth,  becomes  a  social 
power,  an  attraction  to  the  Slite  of  a  metropolitan  com- 
munity ;  or  with  conservative  success,  in  holding  fast  an 
ancient  creed   or  a   venerable   liturgy,  building  up   a 
church  which  is  anchored  safely  in  a  harbor  whose  coast 
bristles  with  polemic  defenses ;  or  with  even  that  kind 
of  missionary  success  which  expresses  itself  in  heavy 
pecuniary  contributions   to  the  support  of  missionary 
boards  whose  names  have  become  an  honor  in  the  com- 
mercial world,  —  I   say,  let  a  pastor  be  content  with 
/  such  incidental  and  exterior  successes  as  these,  while 
/   no  proportionate  results  are  seen  in  the  direct  business 
.  I    of  saving  souls,  and  building  up  in  them  and  by  them 
\  the  temple  of  the  living  God,  and  his  ministry,  in  an 
} eternal  estimate   of  its  value,  may  be  a  dead  failure. 
/  The  soundest  historic  orthodoxy  may  be  preached  in 
/    that  pulpit ;  numbers  may  throng  those  pews ;  wealth 
\     may  flow  from  them  like  water,  as  if  at  God's  bidding : 
!    yet,  to  the  look  of  ministering  angels,  that  church  may 
'     be  but  a  wretched  burlesque  of  what  it  seems  to  be  to 
I      an   admiring   world.      The   world   of  sin   and   misery 
,      around  it  may  feel  its  existence  as  little  as  the  solid 
j      globe  feels  concussion  with  a  peach-blossom.     Yet  this 
Is  sometimes  the  sequence  of  a  morbid   antipathy   to 
fjitiaticism  in  a  fashionable  pulpit. 

(4)  Probably  one  of  the  most  notable  examples  of  a 
really  powerful  mind  which  was  often  thus  crippled  in 
the  pulpit  by  ita  fear  of  fanaticism  was  Dr.  Robert 
South.  A  man  of  more  brawny  J'orce  of_intellect 
Qcver  stood  in  an  English  pulpit.     He  has  scarcely  had 


^lA.rfirA. 


LKCT   xxxm.]     CONCLUSION:    CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS.     475 

his  equal  in  command  of  that  Saxon  English  Tvhich 
gives  to  speech  power  over  the  masses  of  his  country- 
men. In  his  delineation  of  the  weak  points  of  human 
nature  he  was  the  peer  of  Shakespeare.  He  deserves 
to  rank  among  the  most  racy  of  English  satirists.  Hia 
casuistical  sermons  indicate  a  marvelous  insight  into 
human  motives.  He  adhered  stoutly  to  the  Genevan 
theology,  —  a  theology  which  has  always  held  sway  in 
England  when  the  pulpit  has  been  eminent  among  the 
practical  forces  of  the  age.  To  the  court  of  the  second 
Charles  he  might  have  been  what  John  Knox  was  to 
that  of  Queen  Mary.  He  was  courage  incarnate.  He 
read  prayers  at  Westminster  on  the  day  of  the  execu- 
tion of  Charles  the  First,  praying  for  his  Majesty  by 
name.  He  had  the  intellectual  resources  and  the  tem- 
perament of  a  reformer  at  his  command,  at  a  time  when 
England  ran  wild  in  its  re-actioiT  from  the  rule  of  the 
Commonwealth,  and  needed  just  such  a  mind  as  his  at 
the  head  of  the  English  pulpit  to  stay  the  torrent  of 
corruption  which  was  flooding  the  Church. 

Yet,  with  this  singular  adaptation  of  resources  to 
opportunity,  he  missed  it  as  fatally  as  if  he  had  been 
imbecile.  The  sermons  on  which  his  fame  as  a  preach- 
er chrefly  rests  breathe  scarcely  a  hint  of  apostolic 
appreciation  of  the  crisis  in  which  he  acted.  Indeed, 
some  of  them  hardly  suggest  the  possibility  of  their 
having  been  instrumental  in  the  salvation  of  souls. 
Why  ?  It  is  not  for  the  want  of  sound  evangelical 
themes  from  pungent  biblical  texts.  Some  of  them 
are  among  the  imperial  themes,  such  as  President 
Edwards  would  have  used  in  the  "  Great  Awakening." 
It  is  not  for  the  want  of  practicality  of  aim  in  hia 
discussions.  Many  of  them  are  replete  with  applica* 
tioa  to  real  life  as  he  read  it.     What  is  it,  then,  that 


476  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.      Flectp.  xixin. 

takes  religious  life  out  of  so  many  of  his  sermons,  and 
gives  them  the  title  which  modern  criticism  has  applied 
to  them,  of  "week-day  sermons"?  Why  are  they 
read  now  as  standards  of  literature,  rather  than  of  the 
evangelical  life  of  the  pulpit?  Robert  South  was  for 
more  than  fifty  years  contemporary  with  Richard  Baxter. 
Why  did  South  leave  for  posterity  the  sermon  against 
Extemporaneous  Prayer,  and  the  sermon  in  Memory  of 
Charles  the  First,  the  "Royal  martyr  of  blessed  mem- 
ory," while  Baxter  left  the  "Saints'  Rest"  and  the 
"Call  to  the  Unconverted"? 

I  answer,  South  was  corroded  by  his  enmity  to  Puri- 
tan fanaticism.  His  pulpit  was  eaten  through  by  that 
dry-rot.  South  the  preacher  shriveled  into  South  the 
courtier.  The  prince  of  preachers  became  the  most 
servile  of  courtiers,  whenever  he  stood  face  to  face  with 
the  reformatory  spirit  of  the  age.  That  spirit  saluted 
him,  and  gave  him  his  great  opportunity;  and  he  re- 
buffed it  with  ridicule  and  invective.  Thenceforth  hia 
eye  was  closed  for  ever  upon  the  future  of  England. 
While  prophets  and  apostles  were  moving  in  the  air, 
he  could  see  no  other  revelation  in  the  heavens  than 
that  Cromwell  was  "Baal,"  and  Milton  a  "blind 
adder."  Yet  one  might  cull  from  the  unpublished  lit- 
erature of  the  pulpit  of  every  generation  since  his  day, 
discourses,  which,  with  none  of  his  genius,  resemble 
many  of  his  in  this,  —  their  incapacity  for  evangelical 
^iises,  occasioned  by  their  recoil  from  evangelical  fanati- 
cism. Dr.  South  heads  the  list  of  a  class  of  preachers, 
of  which  every  age  has  its  representatives. 

4th,  To  the  causes  which  have  now  been  named  as 
tending  to  enervate  the  applicatory  power  of  preaching, 
should  be  added  one  other,  —  the  cherishing  of  theolo- 
gical theories  which  are  unfriendly  to  rational  uses  of 
truth. 


LBd.  xxxm.]     CONCLUSION :    CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS.     477 

(1)  Varieties  in  theological  opinion  may,  in  one 
aspect  of  them,  be  classified  as  those  of  a  theology 
which  can,  and  those  of  a  theology  which  can  not,  be 
preached.  That  is  to  say,  those  of  the  latter  class  can 
not  be  rationally  used  for  the  practical  purposes  of  the 
pulpit.  May  we  not  now  regard  it  as  a  fact  well  under- 
stood among  intelligent  students  in  theology,  that  there 
are  dogmas  which  have  a  place  in  historic  creeds,  which 
earnest  men  are  constrained  to  abandon  or  to  suspend 
when  they  enter  the  pulpit  ?  We  find  such  dogmas  in 
the  creeds,  ancient  and  modern.  They  come  to  us  sus- 
tained by  traditionary  reverence.  They  are  still  taught 
in  theological  schools.  In  systems  of  divinity  they  can 
be  made  plausible.  In  a  word,  in  every  form  in  which 
theology  is  shaped,  aloof  from  the  living  world,  they 
may  live,  they  do  live.  But,  in  contact  with  real  life, 
they  fade  out  of  a  man's  faith.  For  practical  uses  they 
are  forgotten.  They  do  not  constitute  a  working  the- 
ology, and  they  never  did.  They  were  monastic  or 
academic  in  their  origin.  Christianity  as  a  living  faith 
has  buoyed  them  up,  and  kept  itself  afloat  in  spite  of 
them.  They  have  never  caught  a  breath  of  spontane- 
ous favor  from  the  popular  heart,  and  they  never  can 
do  so. 

A  preacher  therefore  finds  them  to  be  encumbrances 
upon  the  working  power  of  the  pulpit.  He  must  apply 
them  to  humanity  in  the  abstract,  not  to  men  and 
women  as  he  finds  them.  Least  of  all  can  he  red'ice 
them  to  such  simple  forms  that  he  can  preach  them  to 
an  intelligent  child.  A  catechism  which  contains  them 
falls  into  disuse  in  Sabbath  schools.  Reverend  coun- 
cils and  assemblies  endeavor  to  resuscitate  it  by  ponder- 
ous resolutions  and  letters  of  advice;  but  it  can  not 
compete  with  a  rollicking  song-book. 


} 


47iJ  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,      [leci    xxxrn 

(2)  A  working  theology  in  the  pulpit  must  possess 
three  elements,  —  freedom.. frorn  contradictions  to  itself, 
consonance  with  the  necessary  intuitions  of  the  human 
mind,  and  harmony  with  the  Scriptures  as  a  whole,  and 
as  the  unlettered  mind  reads  them.  Doctrines  which 
will  not  bear  these  tests  of  truth,  no  man  can  use 
effectively  in  preaching.  A  theology  which  is  pervaded 
by  the  spirit  of  such  dogmas,  or  which  is  founded  on 
them  as  a  philosophical  basis,  is  so  far  enfeebled  as  a 
practical  force,  whatever  other  valuable  truths  it  may 
contain,  or  with  whatever  skill  in  dialectics  it  may  be 
defended.  The  entire  applicatory  significance  of  the 
gospel  must  be  impaired,  so  far  as  it  is  loaded  with 
these  impracticable  weights,  even  though  they  are  kept 
out  of  sight. 

/  Medical  science  has  invented  an  instrument  by 
(  which,  when  grasped  in  the  hand  of  one  who  is  sinking 
under  partial  paralysis,  may  be  measured  the  exact  de- 
cline of  nervous  force  throughout  the  system.  Such  a 
dynamometer  is  the  pulpit,  when  held  in  the  grasp  of 
an  impracticable  theology.  Just  in  proportion  to  the 
authority  of  that  theology  in  the  pulpit  does  the  pulpit 
work  nervelessly,  even  to  the  extent,  it  may  be,  of 
paralytic  debility.    ^ 

(3)  As  examples  of  this  refractory  theology,  the 
following  well-known  dogmas  deserve  specification ; 
namely,  the  theory  of  a  limited  Atonement ;  the  theory 
of  the  imputation  of  Adam's  sin,  as  a  test  of  character 
and  a  ground  of  retribution,  to  his  posterity ;  the  con- 
sequent  theory  of  sin  as  constitutional  guilt ;  the  inevi- 
table inference  from  this  of  a  sinner's  inability  to  obey 
the  commands  of  God ;  the  theory  of  the  untrustworthi- 
ness  of  the  human  reason  in  matters  of  religion;  the 
ine^^table   inference  from   this,  that   reason   and  faith 


LECT.  xxiin.J     CONCLUSION :    CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS.     479 

conflict,  and  that  in  the  conflict  reason  must  of  course 
give  way;  the  theory  that  election  to  salvation  is,  as 
President  Edwards  repeatedly  represents  it,  the  "  arbi- 
trary "  will  of  God;  whatever  Edwards  may  have 
meant  by  this,  multitudes  of  his  disciples  have  meant 
by  it  just  what  it  seems  to  mean  to  the  popular  mind, 
and  so  they  have  been  understood  in  their  pulpits ;  the 
cognate  theory  of  the  intrinsic  unfitness  of  truth  to 
move  an  unregenerate  heart  otherwise  than  to  develop 
and  consolidate  its  depravity ;  the  theory  that  it  is  not 
the  secret  purpose  of  God  to  save  more  than  a  frag- 
ment of  the  human  race ;  the  consequent  conception  of 
Christianity,  as  being  an  elective  system  to  the  few,  and 
simply  a  detective  system  to  the  many,  —  being  to  these 
only  a  test  of  that  depraved  character,  which  it  brings 
to  light  and  develops  to  the  full  in  fitness  for  eternal 
retribution:  this  I  understand  to  have  been  the  gist  of 
the  theory  held  by  the  late  Rev.  Dr.  Lord  of  Hanover, 
and  in  which  he  has  had  a  respectable  following. 

(4)  We  are  not  now  concerned  with  the  truth  or 
falsehood  of  these  theories.  Much  may  be  said  in  the 
defense  of  every  one  of  them.  They  have  commanded 
the  theoretic  trust  of  able  and  godly  men.  I  have  no 
heart  to  speak  with  disrespect  of  any  thing  which  such 
men  have  revered.  More,  even,  than  this  may  be  con- 
ceded to  them :  we  may  admit  the  truth  of  the  whole 
of  them,  and  yet  the  oratorical  objection  to  them  now 
before  us  will  not  be  invalidated. 

(5)  The  point  I  wish  to  emphasize  is  that  these 
theories  are  not  rational_^  elements  of  persuasion  in 
preaching.  If  we  wish  to  persuade  men  to  their  salva- 
tion, we  must  find  other  materials  than  these  to  do  it 
with.  More  than  this,  these  doctrines,  if  held  in  the 
pulpit,  must  be  held  in  silence.     They  must  be  kept 


480  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING,      [lbct.  xraik 

out  of  sight.  True  or  false,  it  makes  no  difPerenco 
Suasive  power  is  not  in  these  doctrines ;  and  they  can 
not,  by  any  rational  process  of  speech,  be  galvanized 
into  resources  of  persuasion  to  any  rational  being  who 
can  be  induced  to  accept  them  intelligently. 

These  dogmas,  therefore,  are  alien  to  the  design  of 
preaching,  hostile  to  a  preacher's  mission,  discouraging 
to  a  preacher's  hopes,  withering  to  all  rational  zeal  in 
his  work ;  and  they  build  a  firmament  of  brass  to  his 
prayers.  Omnipotence,  by  making  these  doctrines  true, 
could  not  change  their  bearing  upon  the  moral  nature 
of  man,  witnout  first  re-creating  that  nature,  and  mak- 
ing the  human  race  something  other  than  it  is.  The 
gospel,  as  a  system  of  moral  forces  applicable  to  man- 
kind as  it  is,  ceases  to  exist,  so  soon  as  these  theories 
concerning  it  receive  the  divine  sanction.  It  is  de- 
graded into  an  arbitrary  attempt  to  fit  things  into  an 
arbitrary  system,  by  an  arbitrary  expedient  in  which  a 
reasoning  being  can  see  no  sense,  and  for  which  he  can 
discover  no  use.  A  more  hopeless  spot  in  this  universe, 
outside  of  the  world  of  retribution,  you  can  not  then 
find,  than  a  Christian  pulpit. 

(6)  Two  inquiries  are  suggested  here,  in  opposition 
to  the  view  advanced.  I  admit  that  the  points  which 
they  express  are  fairly  taken,  in  the  way  of  objection, 
and  they  deserve  an  answer.  One  is  the  inquiry,  "  Are 
not  the  perils  here  indicated  peculiar  to  a  theological 
extreme  ;  and  are  not  equal  perils  incident  to  the  oppo- 
site extreme  of  dogmatic  belief?"  I  answer,  most 
certainly  this  is  true.  If  my  object,  at  present,  were 
to  teach  the  true  proportions  of  theologic  science,  I 
should  mark  those  perils  as  earnestly  as  these,  and 
should  characterize  them  as  severely.  But  my  province 
is  not  to  teach  theology  as  such,  but  only  the  homiletio 


C  h 


-.<i 


Li 


tJiCT.  xxim.]     CONCLUSION  .    CAUSES  OP  WEAKNESS.     481 

forms  and  uses  of  it.  The  dangers  incident  to  the 
theological  extreme  opposite  to  that  "which  I  have  de- 
fined do  not  imperil,  as  that  does,  the  existence  of  the 
pulpit  as  a  power  of  persuasion.  If  I  exaggerate  the- 
ologic  truth  on  the  humanitarian  side  of  it,  and  distend 
it  in  the  line  of  free  agency,  till  it  becomes  a  system  of 
distortions,  I  imperil  the  pulpit  in  other  respects,  but 
not  in  this,  —  of  crowding  out  of  it  rational  uses  of  truth 
in  application  to  free  moral  beings,  such  as  all  men  feel 
themselves  to  be.  Those  uses,  and  a  prepossession  foi 
them,  and  an  undue,  even  a  suicidal  dependence  upon 
them  for  the  work  of  the  pulpit,  are  germane  to  the 
very  errors  of  an  extremist  in  that  direction. 

But  the  misfortune  of  these  other  distortions  which 
I  have  specified  is  that  they  cut  the  pulpit  loose  from 
strictly  rational  uses  of  any  thing  in  preaching.  They 
do  not  belong  to  a  moral  system  at  all.  Under  the 
gloom  of  such  theories,  hearers  are  not  proper  subjects  » 

of  the  appliances  of   persuasion.     Persuasion,   how?         / 
Persuasion  by  what?    Persuasion  to  what?    Nothing        ' 
in  the  system  gives  intelligible  answer.     Man  is  no 
longer  a  moral  being,  in  God's  image,  susceptible  to      I 
right  motive,  capable  of  holy  choice.     Under  the  dead-     I 
weight  of  such  a  system  of  government,  —  I  can  not  call 
it  "moral"  government,  —  men  are  no  more  proper     . 
subjects  of  right  influence  by  the  instrumentality  of  / 
preaching  than  so  many  oak-trees.  / 

Worse  than  this  even  is  their  condition;  and  more 
hopeless  is  the  mission  of  a  preacher  to  such  a  world. 
For  having  lost  by  divine  decree,  and  through  inherited 
depravity,  all  susceptibility  to  truth  as  a  regenerating 
and  sanctifying  power,  and  yet  retaining  susceptibility 
to  truth  as  an  aggravating  and  depraving  power,  men  / 
are  by  nature  the  kindred  of  devils  in  their  moral  cp]|«     / 


\ 


482  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING,      [lbxtt.  xxxm 

stitution.  The  only  possible  effect  of  preaching  is  to 
make  them  devils  in  the  end,  in  their  voluntary  choices. 
The  only  ripened,  full-grown  character  which  they  are 
capable  of  forming  is  that  of  matured  and  full-grown  de- 
pravity. If  the  animus  of  such  a  theology  were  to  con- 
trol the  pulpit  self-consistently,  so  as  to  make  it  a  unit 
in  its  theologic  aim,  and  true  to  itself  in  its  applica- 
tions, the  pulpit  would  become  the  most  fearful  of  re- 
tributive engines  in  intensifying  human  guilt,  and 
reduplicating  human  woe.  For  all  redemptive  work- 
ing, it  would  be  like  an  organ  in  which  the  motor 
nerve  is  paralyzed. 

The  other  of  the  two  inquiries  by  which  the  views 
I  have  advanced  are  fairly  met  is  this.  Have  not  some 
preachers  been  successful,  who  have  held  all  or  some  of 
these  alleged  distortions  in  theology?  Were  not  Au- 
gustine, Turretin,  Calvin,  Knox,  successful  preachers? 
Yet  were  they  not  necessitarians  in  their  philosophy  ? 
Are  not  some  preachers  now  infected  with  these  theo- 
logic errors  who  still  are  wise  in  winning  men  to 
Christ  ?  In  view  of  this  inquiry,  several  facts  deserve 
consideration,  which  will  be  discussed  in  the  next 
lecture. 


l]/lM^ 


M/!, 


LECTURE  XXXIV. 

THE  CONCLUSION:  CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS. 

The  last  lecture  closed  with  the  mention  of  the  in- 
quiry, "Have  not  some  preachers  been  successful  in 
the  pulpit,  who  have  held  all,  or  some,  of  certain  theo- 
logical distortions  previously  enumerated  ?  " 

I  answer,  in  the  first  place,  that  it  is  very  seldom  that 
all  the  dogmas  in  question  find  a  lodgment  in  one 
mind.  Generally  there  is  a  break  in  the  scheme  of 
doctrine  somewhere,  where  light  streams  in  from  a 
different  system,  and  illumines  the  whole. 

In  the  second  place,  these  doctrines,  when  partially 
held,  are  rarely  preached  consistently  to  a  popular  audi- 
__eiica^^  You  hear  them  in  university  pulpits,  but  not 
often,  in  their  completeness,  in  pulpits  erected  for  the 
religious  training  of  an  ordinary  church.  We  have 
read  history  to  little  purpose,  if  we  look  very  confi- 
dently for  theoretic  consistency  anywhere  in  a  great 
work  of  real  life.  The  wisest  of  men  falsify  impracti- 
cable theories  when  the  brunt  of  practical  life  is  to  be 
encountered.  Things  which  are  pets  in  the  study  are 
apt  to  stay  there  when  church-bells  call  to  the  house  of 
God.  It  is  characteristic  of  a  very  able  man  always, 
that  he  flings  consistency  to  the  winds,  if  he  feels  it  to 
be  blocking  the  wheels  of  success  in  a  practical  emer 
gency.    Bishop  Berkeley  was  as  wary  as  other  citizens 


184  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.      riJSOT.  xxxn. 

of  Newport  in  keeping  himself  on  the  safe  side  of  a 
precipice,  though  he  did  not  believe  in  the  existence  of 
precipices. 

In  the  third  place,  the  best  oi  men  falsify  impractical 
ble  theories,  under  the  impulse  of  godly  emotions.  It 
is  characteristic  of  a  very  holy  man,  that  he  becomes  as 
a  little  child  in  his  faith  in  truth,  when  the  fervor  oi  a 
preacher's  mission  is  upon  him.  He  is  then  no  longer 
the  philosopher,  the  schoolman,  the  wise  man,  but  the 
simple  inquirer  after  God's  bidding,  and  then  he  is  apt 
to  welcome  that  as  other  good  men  do,  who  have  no 
philosophy  but  that  of  common  sense.  The  spirit  of  a 
godly  pulpit  is  like  the  spirit  of  prophecy,  when  the 
divine  afflatus  takes  possession  of  it.  Its  language  is, 
*'  Must  I  not  take  heed  to  speak  that  which  the  Lord 
hath  put  into  my  mouth  ?  " 

Hence  it  is  that  the  large  majority  of  preachers  who 
hold  theoretically  dogmas  which  are  unfriendly  to  appli- 
catory  power  in  the  pulpit,  either  do  not  preach  those 
dogmas,  or,  if  they  do^  they  ignore  them  when  the 
point  of  application  comes  in  the  sermon  which  contains 
them.  The  two  ends  of  a  serraon  are  often  charming 
contraucs  to  the  eye  of  a  logician.  The  Rev.  James_ 
Alexander,  D.D.,  believed  the  doctrine  of  limited 
Atonement ;  but  I  have  been  told  by  one  who  knew  his 
tiabit  in  the  pulpit,  that  nobody  would  have  suspected 
it  from  his  preaching.  Lutherbelieved  in  the  servitude 
of  the  human  will,  and  he  left  no  room  for  doubt  that 
he  believed  it ;  yet  how  sublime  was  his  unconscious 
contradiction  of  it  whenever  he  appealed  to  men  to  re- 
pent I  William  Jay  was  another  of  the  sublime  theolo- 
gians. He  said  he  thought  that  Calvinism,  alluding  to 
the  necessitarian  type  of  it,  was  a  system  to  be  held,  but 
not  a  system  to  be  preached.    Johg^JtlesEfcon  said  it  was 


/^U#i^. 


LBCT.  xxxiv.]     CONCLUSION :    CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS.     485 

the  worst  system  conceivable,  if  preached  theoretically, 
but  the  best  conceivable,  if  preached  practically ;  that 
is,  by  expunging  from  it  its  fatalism. 

All  these  godly  men  in  their  reservations  and  contra- 
dictions meant  one  thing.  They  meant  that  whatever 
their  speculative  theology  contained  which  contradicted 
the  necessary  beliefs  of  men,  and  therefore  hampered 
their  own  souls  in  appealing  to  the  common  sense  and 
conscience  of  their  hearers,  should/befli'ng_aside  when 
the  business  of  jhe^hourw;as  to  persuade  men  to  be 
saved.  Save  men  they  must  and  would  by  ail  means 
at  their  command.  Their  theology  must  take  care  of 
itself. 

On  the  same  principle  of  theoretic  inconsistency  the 
fatalistic  interprejtations  of  Calvinism  are  generally 
held  aloof,  by  those  who  believe  t£em,  from  their  appli- 
cations of  the  gospel  to  their  hearers.  That  is  to  say, 
they  make  those  applications  unconditionally.  They 
do  not  ^remind  men  of  their  arbitrary  destiny  in  the  act 
of  urging  them  to  repent.  They  do  not  say  to  men, 
"Repent  if  you  can;  rej)ent  when  you  can;  repent 
when  God  gives  you  the  chance  to  repent."  "Who  ever 
heard  that  in  a  Christian  pulpit  ?  Who  ever  heard  it 
from  any  school  of  theology  in  a  revival  of  religion  ? 
No:  such  preachers  preach  as  other  good  men  do. 
They  say,  "  Repent,  believe,  obey,  turn  ye :  why  will 
ye  die  ?  "  Under  the  impulse  of  their  godly  emotions 
they  say  these  things  just  as  if  men  could  repent. 
Their  hearers  understand  them  as  if  they  meant  it. 
For  the  time  they  do  mean  it.  Their  necessitarian 
theories  vanish  while  the  practical  business  of  the  pul- 
pit is  in  the  foreground.  Then  the  Spirit  of  God  takes 
them  at  their  word,  and  uses,  not  their  philosophy,  but 
the  gospel,  to  the  salvation  of  souls.    This  is  the  simple 


\ 


486  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,      [ubct.  xxxiT 

history  of  a  thousand  necessitarian  pulpits.  Oonsclence, 
moved  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  if  momentarily  left  to  itself 
by  the  necessitarian  tyranny,  is  quick  to  spring  to  its 
supremacy.  It  will  then  often  lead  men  in  triumph  to 
their  liberty  and  to  the  proof,  in  the  very  face  of  the 
al umbering  philosophy,  that  they  can  repent  by  the  act 
of  repenting.  A  certain  Scotch  preacher,  who  held  the 
theology  of  John  Knox  without  abatement,  had  for 
years  been  accustomed  to  append  to  his  exhortations  to 
repentance  the  proviso  that  the  Holy  Spirit  should  im- 
part the  power  to  repent.  At  length,  one  day,  his  apos- 
tolic emotions  so  over-mastered  him,  that  he  forgot  the 
wonted  proviso,  and  let  the  exhortation  stand  by  itself. 
At  the  close  of  the  day  a  poor  woman  whom  his  phi- 
losophy had  kept  in  bondage  for  years,  so  the  story 
reads,  came  to  him  weeping  tears  of  penitence  and 
joy,  and  said  to  him,  "  Why  didna  ye  ever  tell  me  afore 
that  I  could  believe  ?  " 

The  majority  of  fatalistic  preachers  of  our  own  day 
do  tell  sinners  virtually  that  they  can  believe  by  the 
freeness  with  which,  in  the  applications  of  their  ser- 
mons, they  exhort  them  to  believe.  It  makes  a  vast 
difference  to  an  awakened  soul,  if,  at  a  certain  juncture 
of  its  destiny,  it  is  not  reminded  of  its  philosophic 
impotence.  Silence  on  that  point  carries  decisive  impli- 
cations. The  Holy  Spirit  is  quick  and  condescending 
to  use  the  conclusions  of  many  sermons,  not  pausing  to 
Bettle  their  consistency  with  the  beginnings.  The  prac- 
tical hortation,  with  its  invincible  implications  of  hu- 
man freedom,  has  behind  it  the  whole  force  of  the 
conscience  and  of  the  common  sense  of  men.  That 
buttress  the  necessitarian  theology  never  has.  Is  it 
not  quite  intelligible,  therefore,  that  many  necessitarian 
preachers  should  have  success  in  saving  souls  ?    Com- 


LECT.  XXXIV.]     CONCLUSION:    CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS.     487 

pact  together  the  apostolic  fervor  of  the  preacher,  and 
the  oratorical  tact  which  that  creates,  and  the  uncon- 
scious magnetism  of  the  man,  and  the  truth  of  God 
which  he  utters  at  God's  bidding,  and  the  supremacy 
of  conscience  in  the  hearer,  and  the  auxiliary  force 
of  his  common  sense,  all  wielded  by  the  Holy  Ghost, 
impelling  the  sinner's  will  one  way,  and  what  chance, 
speaking  as  the  world  speaks,  has  the  fatalism  preached 
a  half-hour  ago  against  the  present  omnipotence  of  such 
an  alliance  of  moral  forces  ? 

But  it  may  be  imagined,  that,  if  these  theologic  errors 
are  so  easily  counteracted  by  the  happy  inconsistencies 
of  preachers,  they  are  of  little  or  no  moment  in  the    t 
pulpit.     Why  make  an  ado  over  them?     This  leadj  /    ^ 
me  to  remark,  in  the  fourth  place,  that  a  theoretic  I 
contradiction  in  the  theology  of  the  pulpit  can  never~^ 
be  wholly  neutralized  in  its  practical  influence.     De- 
pravity is  quick-witted.     It  is  a  sharp  detective.     It 
never  ignores  the  inconsistencies   of  the   pulpit.      In 
times  of  religious  awakening  it  is  assisted  by  spiritual 
tempters,  who,  in  all  heathen  history,  have  employed 
nothing  else  so  destructively  to  the  souls  of  men  as., 
^^lism.  ^    Numerically  the  large  majority  of  mankind 
probably  are  held  in  bondage  to-day  by  that  one  form 
of    theologic   error.      That  is   an   appalling    conquest 
which  the  powers  of  evil  make  when  they  succeed  in 
enthroning  that  error  in  a  Christian  pulpit  under  Chris- 
tian forms.     It  is   inconceivable   that  such  a  pulpit 
should  be  as  effective  for  good  in  its  appeals  to  men  as 
it  would  be  in  whole-souled  applications  of  the  truth, 
in  which  the  head  and  the  heart  of  the  preacher  should 
move  in  harmony.     Here,  as  elsewhere   in  oratorical 
speech,  unity  of  spirit  is  essential  to  the  ideal  success.  -— 

Moreover,  in  the  fifth  place,  it  is  not  true  that  aU         y 


«88  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHrNG.     [ubct.  xjlxij 

fatalistic  theologians  in  the  pulpit  do  save  their  useful, 
ness  by  '  happy  inconsistencies."     Some  minds  are  too 
unelastic  in  their  intellectual  make  to  admit  of  a  prac- 
tical rebound  from  the  logic  of  their  theories.     Of  this 
class  was  the  mind  of  John  Foster.     He  clung  to  1  is 
theory  of  the  constitutional  guilt  and  the  irresponsible 
helplessness,  yet  the  fatal  doom,  of  mankind,  till  it  had 
tinged  with  gloom  all  his  views  of  this  life,  and  driven 
him  in  desperation  to  an  equivalent  of  the  doctrine  of 
uni  rersal  salvation.     He  could  find  no  other  refuge  for 
his  faith  in  the  benevolence  of  God.     It  is  impossible 
that  so  rare  a  thinker  would  not  have  been  a  more  suc- 
cessful preacher  if  he  had  held  a  theory  of  depravity 
which  should  have  made  preaching  a  rational  business. 
The  Rev.  Dr.  John  M.  Mason,  a  celebrated  preacher 
in  the  city  of  New  York  in  the  early  part  of  this  cen- 
tury, and  the  model  of  pulpit  eloquence  to  a  multitude 
of  his  admirers,  held  consistently  his  theory  of  limited 
Atonement  and  imputed  guilt  and  arbitrary  election  and 
reprobation;  and  the  consequence  was  that  a  revival 
of  religion  was  an  occasion  of  sorrow  to  him,  because 
he  was  unable  to  adjust  his  preaching  to  its  obvious 
demands.     He  confessed  to   Professor  Stuart,   in  the 
midst  of  a  revival  at  New  Haven,  that  he  dared  not 
preach  to  impenitent  men  as  New  England  preachers  of 
the  school  to  which  Professor  Stuart  belonged  were  then 
accustomed  to  preach.     He  could  not  offer  salvation  to 
unregenerate  men  as  if  it  were  designed  for  them,  and 
as  if  he  expected  them  to  accept  it  by  repentance  and 
faith ;  for  he  did  not  believe  they  were  capable  of  either. 
Such  preachers  represent  a  class  of  logically  consistent 
C   thmkers  and  honest  men,  who   must  ^preach  as  they 
I  believe,  and  who,  on  some  themes,  believe  that  which 
*|forbidfl  them  to  preach  the  truths  which  an  awakened 


Lwrr.  XXXIV.]    CONCLUSION :   CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS.     489 

conscience  craves.  A  fearful  burden  is  that  under 
which  an  honest  man  sinks  in  the  pulpit,  when  he 
can  not  offer  a  free  salvation  to  the  souls  of  his  hearers 
without  conscious  perjury  to  his  own. 

But  there  remains  to  be  noticed,  in  the  sixth  place,       y^ 
a  class  of  preachers,  meager  in  number  it  is  to  be        C 
hoped,  whose  fatalistic  theology  is  held  and  preached 
consistently  and  heartlessly.      Serene   and  contented 

believers  are  they  of  their  favorite  dogmas,  unmitigated 

by  the  inconsistencies  either  of  great  genius  or  of  godly 
emotions ;  and  they  themselves  are  unconscious  of  any 
burden  in  their  inability  to  preach  so  as  to  win  men  to 
Christ.  Their  homiletic  power  is  exhausted  in  parading 
with  hideous  consistency  a  theology,  which,  set  in  the 
frame-work  which  such  minds  create  for  it,  is  worthy 
of  a  Turk. 

I  do  not  speak  with  such  severity,  without  an  exam- 
ple in  mind  which  you  will  denounce  with  equal  indig- 
nation. A  preacher  in  one  of  the  fossilized  towns  on 
the  Hudson  River  once  preached  a  discourse  on  the 
duty  of  repentance,  which,  after  a  discussion  in  brazen 
consistency  with  its  application,  he  ended  substantially 
in  this  wise,  as  reported  to  me  by  one  of  his  hearers  v 
"My  impenitent  friends,  if  I  did  not  know  that  the\ 
timei  and  the  seasons  are  in  God's  hand,  I  should 
even  exhort  you  to  the  immediate  performance  of  this 
momentous  duty.  But  'it  is  not  of  him  that  will- 
eth,  nor  of  him  that  runneth,  but  of  God  that  show- 
eth  mercy  .  .  .  He  hath  mercy  on  whom  he  will  have 
mercy,  and  whom  he  will  he  hardeneth.'  I  therefore 
pray  you  to  watch  for  the  Lord's  time,  and,  if  you 
ever  receive  his  gracious  calling,  obey  it  and  be  saved : 
which  may  God  in  his  mercy  grant  I  " 

Is  this  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  ?    Is  it  the  preach- 


yVl/iA-itUj     *-^'    ^AvCck^jt  pi^ 


)C^^^^ciri^£irp€' 


490  IHE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,      [lect.  xjlxit. 

ing  of  any  thing  that  is  worthy  of  a  sane  man,  or  of  a 
benevolent  God?  Could  not  one  preach  as  rationally 
to  a  herd  of  buffaloes?  I  am  glad  to  be  able  to  say 
that  I  never  heard  such  a  sermon.  Probably  you  never 
did.  The  men  in  the  pulpit  who  can  preach  thus  are 
cheeringly  few:  but  that  there  was  ever  one  such  is 
evidence  that  probably  there  have  been  others ;  for  it 
is  the  only  consistent  hortation  which  can  follow  cer- 
tain theologic  opinions  which  have  been  extensively 
held.  Many  have  maintained  their  consistency  by 
silence,  so  far  as  unregenerate  hearers  are  concerned. 
Many  preachers  have  preached  only  to  converted  hear- 
ers, and  to  them  have  preached  so  as  to  gain  the  repu- 
tation, and  justly,  of  able  and  godly  men. 

Making  all  the  deductions,  then,  which  the  facts  of 
history  will  warrant,  a  charitable  judgment  leaves  the 
pulpit  beset  by  the  causes  which  have  now  been 
named,  operating  with  variable  force  to  invalidate  the 
applicatory  power  of  preaching.  The  literature  of  the 
pulpit,  j)ublished  and  unpublished,  gives  evidence  that 
these  malarial  influences  infect  the  atmosphere  of  min- 
istries otherwise  able  and  commanding:  they  indicate 
certain  perpetual  dangers  to  which  the  best  of  preach- 
ers are  exposed,  and  against  which  they  need  perpetu- 
ally to  guard  themselves.  Men  who  are  useful  in  spite 
of  them  are  not  as  useful  as  they  might  be:  they 
carry  dead-weights  in  the  race :  they  are  shorn  of 
strength  which  is  their  natural  birthright. 

III.  The  power  of  such  causes  as  we  have  been  con- 
sidering to  impair  the  practical  force  of  the  pulpit 
is  more  clearly  seen  in  the  contrast  with  the  fact  which 
I  proceed  now  to  notice  as  the  third  general  topic  in 
the  treatment  of  conclusions.  It  is  the  intensity  given 
to  the  applicatory  uses  of  truth  by  the  evangelical 
theory  of  preaching.  ~~- 


/ 


LEcrr.  xxxrv.]     CONCLUSION :    CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS.     491 

The  facts  and  principles  most  essential  to  the  devel- 
opment of  this  truth  you  will  readily  anticipate.  I 
name  them  with  brief  remark.  They  are  facts  and 
principles  which  the  evangelical^thg^^of  prftar.tnng 
always  assumes  in  practice,  whatever  it  may  be  in  the 
abstract.  Godly  preachers  of  all  schools  in  theology, 
who  are  intent  on  the  saving  of  souls,  always  act  on 
the  assumption  of  these  truths,  whether  consistently  or 
not.     They  are  the  following.  \ 

1st,  The  extreme  emergency  in  which  the  gospel  | 
tinds  men.  Evangelical  preaching  addresses  men  as  r 
lost  beings.  It  is  speech  in  the  most  formidable  of  ^ 
emergencies.  The  emergency  is  real :  the  peril  is  immi- 
nent. The  most  tragic  of  catastrophes  is  in  the  pros- 
pect, is  actually  occurring  all  the  while  in  those  invisi- 
ble processes  by  which  moral  natures  are  indurated  in 
sin,  and  from  which  they  pass  on  to  a  hopeless  eternity. 
There  is  no  softening  of  it  in  the  primary  conception 
of  what  men  are,  and  what  their  moral  prospects  are, 
as  the  gospel  finds  them.  This  is  the  initial  idea  held 
by  an  evangelical  pulpit.  We  believe  this:  we  come 
to  our  work  with  this  idea  uppermost  in  our  thoughts 
of  what  we  have  to  do.  A  continent  heaving  in  the 
throes  of  an  earthquake  is  not  more  exigent  in  its 
pressure  on  the  sensibilities  and  the  working  energies 
of  men  than  the  condition  of  this  world  is  as  it  lies 
mapped  out  before  the  mind  of  a  Christian  preacher. 

2d,  The  second  fact  is  the  sufficiency  of  the  provis- 
ions of  jbhe  gospel  to  save  men.  This  is  as  real  as  the 
necessity  of  salvation  in  the  evangelical  theory.  The 
one  is  the  counterpart  of  the  other  in  intensity  of  mean-  - 
ing.  The  provisions  are  ample  to  meet  the  emergency. 
This  world  is  a  wreck  surrounded  with  life-boats.  It 
is  a  lost  battle-f  eld,  with  reserves  at  hand  which  are 


492  THE  THEORY  OF  PEEACHINQ.      iL&cr.  xjolit 

ample  to  reverse  the  fortunes  of  the  day.  It  is  a  world 
on  fire,  \vith  the  windows  of  heaven  opening  over  the 
conflagration.  This,  too,  we  believe.  We  come  to  our 
work  with  the  conviction  that  the  loss  of  a  soul  is 
never  a  necessary  catastrophe.  We  can  not  express  our 
work  more  significantly  than  when  we  call  it  the  busi- 
ness of  saving  souls.  Not  retribution,  but  eternal  life, 
)is  the  chief  burden  of  our  message. 
3d, JQhejHEd  fact  is,  therefore,  that,  in  the  evangeli- 
cal theory,  this  work  of  saving  souls  is  a_practicable 
business.  We  do  not  concede  that  it  contains  a  scintilla 
y     •  of  romance.     It  is  a  plain,  prosaic  business  of  real  life 

l6t^i     as  truly  as  the   navigation  of  the  sea.     That  is  not 
.  I    preaching  which  expends  itself  in  imaginative  discus- 

fttlHl  Jg^Qj^g^  In  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  preaching  is  a 
sound' and  hopeful  business  for  a  practicable  object. 
Its  distinguishing  characteristic  is  good  sense.  We 
believe  this.  We  come  to  our  work  with  the  convic- 
tion that  we  have  a  just  claim  to  the  approval  of  the 
common  sense  of  men,  in  concentrating  our  strength 
upon  the  work  of  saving  souls.  The  history  of  our 
work  proves  this.  It  has  been  a  success :  it  is  a  suc- 
cess: its  future  is  a  triumph.  Our  missionaries  have 
stood  before  princes  in  this  work  of  saving  a  world,  as 
calmly  as  Columbus  did  when  he  pleaded  for  the  means 
of  discovering  a  world.  No  man  who  is  thoroughly 
possessed  of  the  evangelical  faith  on  this  subject  ever 

/  has  a  misgiving  respecting  it. 

I  4th,  And  this  is  true  because  of  a  fourth  fact  in  our 

theory,  —  that  preaching,  above  all  other  instrumentali- 
ties, is  divinely  appointed  to  success  in  saving  men. 
The  gospel  proclaimed  by  the  living  voice  has  pre- 
eminently the  divine  sanction.  Not  the  press,  not  the 
universities,  not  the   libraries   of  the  world,  but  the 


y4-^     \fi 


MiCT.  xxxiy.]     (CONCLUSION :    CAUSES  OF  WEAKNESS.     493 

pulpit,  is  the  chief  agency  concerned  in  the  develop 
ment  of  divine  decrees  to  this  end.  Men  exist,  or- 
dained to  this  work  by  divine  appointment.  Preaching 
is  performed  thus  under  the  shadow  of  an  Almighty 
Presence :  it  is  done  in  execution  of  an  Infinite  Will. 
This,  also,  we  believe.  We  come  to  our  work  impelled 
to  it  by  an  eternal  decree.  For  this  cause  came  we  into 
the  world.  We  do  not  appreciate  our  calling  until  we 
itccept  it  as  a  calling  of  God,  a  high  calling,  a  calling 
for  which  we  have  reason  to  revere  ourselves.  We  are 
not  qualified  for  our  work  if  we  do  not  accept  in  holy 
faith  this  fact  of  a  divine  indwelling. 

5th,  A  fifth  fact  in  the  evangelical  theory  of  preach- 
ing is  that  the  philosophy  of  its  working  is  in  entire 
accordance  with  the  law_a-Qf_-the  himian  mind.  Not 
only  is  success  in  preaching  practicable,  not  only  is  it 
ordained  of  God,  but  the  rationale  of  the  process  by 
which  it  achieves  success  contains  nothing  contra- 
dictory to  the  laws  of  the  human  mind,  or  suspensive 
of  those  laws.  Divine  decree  in  the  work  does  not 
ignore  those  laws.  Decree  embraces  and  energizes 
the  very  laws  by  which  mind  acts  on  mind  in  this  *) 
work.  Preaching  therefore  has  no  concern  with  any 
miraculous  process  in  its  ways  of  working.  Conversion 
is  not  a  miracle.  Persuasion  to  repentance  is  not  a'^ 
miracle.  Persuasion  by  preaching  is  achieved  by  the 
very  same  means  and  methods  of  speech  by  which  men 
are  successfully  moved  by  eloquent  address  on  other 
than  religious  subjects  of  human  thought.  On  the 
evangelical  theory  the  pulpit  claims  no  exemption 
from  depeiidehce  on  natural  laws.  We  do  not  expect 
to  escape  the  consequences  of  their  violation.  We 
entertain  no  such  notion  of  dependence  on  the  Holy 
Ghost  as  to  encourage  neglect  or  abuse  of  the  arts  of 


/ 


(r.;.  .tU^--  ^^(^ 


494  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,      [lbct.  xxxiv 

speech.  We  use  those  arts,  depend  upon  them,  look  foi 
success  in  them,  as  if  we  had  no  other  hope  of  success 
than  that  which  encourages  speech  in  the  senate  or  at 
the  bar.  This  again  we  believe.  We  come  to  our  work 
as  philosophers  as  well  as  preachers.  The  telescope  is 
not  constructed  with  faith  in  the  operation  of  natural 
laws  more  wisely  than  the  theory  of  preaching  is  with 
faith  in  the  laws  of  the  human  mind. 

The  point  respecting  these  five  truths  which  I  would 
emphasize  is  this,  that  successful  preachers,  whatever 
they  may  believe,  or  think  they  believe,  of  some  of 
these  truths  abstractly,  always  assume  the  validity  of 
every  one  of  them  in  that  preaching  which  achieves 
their  success.  Necessitarians,  as  well  as  their  opponents, 
always  preach  as  if  these  things  were  true,  whenever 
they  succeed  in  persuading  men  to  repent.  From  such 
preaching  these  principles  are  every  one  of  them  logical 
inferences,  whatever  the  preacher  may  theoretically  be- 
lieve or  deny.  In  every  genuine  success  they  preach 
as  if  men  were  in  the  emergency  of  lost  souls;  they 
preach  as  if  the  provisions  of  grace  were  adequate  to  the 
salvation  of  all  men ;  they  preach  as  if  preaching  were 
a  sensible  business  of  real  life ;  they  preach  as  if  they 
were  called  of  God,  and  ordained  to  his  work;  they 
preach  as  if  they  must  succeed  by  the  natural  use  of 
natural  laws,  and  as  if  they  had  nothing  else  on  which 
to  build  a  hope  of  success.  No  matter  what  they  believe 
outside  of  the  pulpit,  in  the  pulpit,  and  when  the  pro- 
phetic baptism  is  upon  them,  they  preach  as  if  all  these 
things  were  true.  Other  things  being  equal,  success  is 
proportioned  to  the  consistency  and  the  energy  with 
which  they  act  on  these  assumptions.  The  more 
genially  the  head  and  the  heart  unite  in  accepting  these 
principles  as  the  basis  of  operation,  the  more  joyous  is 
the  work,  and  the  more  magnificent  its  results. 


LFCT.  XXXI v.]     CONCLUSION  :    CAUSES  OF   V^EAKNESS.     496 

Such  a  theory  of  preaching  as  is  here  delineated,  it 
needs  hardly  to  be  said,  must  inevitably  work  out  in- 
tense applications  of  truth  in  practice.  Directness, 
pungency,  versatile  invention,  studied  adjustments  of 
truth- to--character,  ingenuity  in  discovery  of  the  uses 
of  the  truth  spring  forth  from  such  a  theory  through 
indubitable  intuitions.  William  Jay  remarks  of  the 
preaching  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Davies,  one  of  his  contempo- 
raries, that  he  preached  like  a  man  who  "never  looked 
off  from  the  value  of  a  soul."  Yet  the  worth  of  the 
soul  is  only  one  of  the  cosmical  ideas  of  our  Christian 
faith.  Infuse  them  all  into  the  conceptions  which  a 
preacher  has  of  his  work  as  a  practical  business,  and 
where  can  you  find  a  combination  of  moral  forces 
which  can  equal  them  in  giving  power  to  human  speech? 

This  suggests  another  fact  which  deserves  special 
mention.  It  is,  that,  under  such  a  theory  of  preach- 
ing, the  pulpit  ought  to  present  examples  of  effective 
eloquence  superior  to  the  productions  of  the  great 
secular  orators  of  history.  The  most  illustrious  secular 
orators  have  been  great  in  their  practical  uses  of  truth. 
As  we  might  expect,  their  power  has  culminated  in  their 
conclusions.  There  they  have  girded  themselves  for 
the  conquest  of  their  audiences.  The  ancient  orators 
threw  the  utmost  vehemence  of  appeal  into  their  pero- 
rations. Their  whole  reserve  of  might  and  will  was 
often  hurled  in  that  last  onset  upon  the  will  of  their 
hearers.  They,  studied,  planned,  executed,  finished 
their  conclusions,  with  most  sedulous  care.  Their 
fame  rests  more  securely  upon  their  perorations  thaa 
upon  any  other  one  feature  of  their  oratory. 

Modern  eloquence,  also,  has  examples  of  the  same 
concentration  of  force,  and  impetuosity  of  movement, 
and  premeditated  skill,  in  conclugicns.     The  closing 


496  THE  THEOKY  OF  PREACHINa.      [ubot.  xxxit 

paragraphs  of  Edmund  Burke's  first  speech  on  the 
impeachment  of  Warren  Hastings  did  more  to  create 
and  perpetuate  his  fame  than  any  other  passage  of  his 
writings.  Hastings  himself  said,  that,  in  listening  to 
them,  he  felt  himself  to  be  the  most  guilty  man  alive. 
Those  paragraphs  Burke  elaborated  sixteen  times 
before  their  delivery.  Lord  Brougham's  conclusion 
of  his  defense  of  Queen  Caroline  established  his  fame 
as  an  advocate  more  securely  than  any  thing  else  of 
equal  length  that  he  ever  wrote.  That  conclusion  he 
wrote  and  re-wrote  twenty  times.  Probably  with  no 
thought  of  rhetorical  art  as  such,  these  men  achieved 
these  triumphs  of  oratorical  genius  through  the  mere 
concentration  of  their  whole  mental  and  moral  being 
upon  the  attainment  of  their  objects. 

The  fact,  then,  which  such  examples  suggest  to  our 
present  purpose,  is,  that,  under  the  evangelical  theory  of 
preaching,  the  pulpit  ought  often  to  exceed  such  oratory 
in  the  power  of  its  applications.  Those  applications 
ought  to  be  more  studiously  premeditated,  and  more 
profoundly  inspired,  than  those  of  secular  speech,  by  as 
much  as  theTFemes~are^ore  weighty,  and  the  resources 
of  appeal  to  the  sensibilities  of  men  are  more  intense. 
With  no  consciousness  whatever  of  oratorical  aim  as 
such,  and  specially  none  of  oratorical  ambition,  preach- 
ers may  reasonably  be  expected  often  to  exceed  the 
eloquence  of  the  senate  and  the  bar,  through  the  mere 
intensity  of  the  oratorical  instinct,  aroused  and  swayed 
by  those  immeasurable  forces  which  are  found  in  the 
elements  of  our  theology. 


-h 


LECTURE  XXXV. 

JIHB    00N0LU8I0N:    APPLICATIONS    OMITI'ED,  OOtfTTINU' 
OUS,   AND   COMPACT. 

IV.  The  intensity  of  the  applicatory  element  in 
preaching,  which  we  have  seen  to  be  intrinsic  to  the 
Christian  theology,  leads  us  naturally  to  an  inquiry 
^hich  forms  the  fourth  general  topic  in  the  discussion 
of  conclusions :  it  is,  Ought  truth  ever  to  be  discussed 
in  a  sermon  without  an  application?  Several  things 
should  be  observed  in  reply  to  this  question. 

1st,  Some  apparent  exceptions  to  the  general  prin- 
ciple are  not  real  exceptions. 

(1)  A  double  sermon,  in  which  the  application  is  re- 
served for  the  peroration  of  the  second  part,  is  not  a 
real  exception.  Rhetorically  the  two  discourses  are 
one.  The  application  of  the  second  is  the  application 
of  both.  At  the  bar  or  in  the  senate  an  equal  amount 
of  material  would  be  spoken  without  a  break. 

But,  even  in  double  sermons,  a  partial  application  of 
the  first  is  often  practicable  at  the  time  of  its  delivery ; 
and,  if  practicable,  it  may  be  desirable.  The  case  will 
rarely  happen  in  which  it  is  logically  necessary  to  dis- 
miss an  audience  with  absolutely  no  indication  of  the 
uses  of  the  subject  for  something  more  than  intel- 
tectual  entertainment. 

The  same  principle  applies  to  serial  preaching.    Every 


498  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       [lbot.  xxxt 

sermon  in  a  series  should,  if  possible,  be  a  unit:  its 
moral  uses  should,  if  possible,  be  developed  at  the  time 
of  its  delivery.  Round  it  off,  and  apply  it  on  the  spot, 
as  Dr.  Chalmers  did  each  one  of  his  discourses  on 
human  depravity.  The  best  serial  sermons  are  those 
m  which  the  serial  feature  is  latent.  But,  if  this  is 
not  so,  still  the  exception  to  the  general  rule  in  the 
delivery  is  only  apparent.  The  whole  discussion  is  a 
unit,  and  is  applied  at  the  end. 

(2)  Another  apparent  exception  which  is  not  a  real 
one  is  that  of  a  discussion  which  a  preacher  fails  to 
apply  through  excess  of  emotion.  This  has  been  some- 
times adduced  as  an  evidence  of  the  power  of  conclu- 
sions without  applications.  The  preacher  closes  a 
sermon  in  tears,  instead  of  words.  Hearers  weep  in 
sympathy.  This  exception  needs  but  a  word  in  reply. 
The  most  powerful  of  all  applications  is  made.  The 
silence  of  suppressed  emotion  surpasses  all  eloquence. 
Speech  then  may  be  silver ;  but  silence  is  golden. 

(3)  A  third  apparent  exception  which  is  not  a  real 
one  is  the  case  of  a  sermon  closed  with  a  prayer  in 
place  of  an  appeal  to  hearers.  This  is  sometimes  ad- 
vanced as  proof  of  the  value  of  sermons  without  appli- 
cations. But  what  does  it  prove  ?  If  it  is  not  genuine, 
it  is  a  piece  of  charlatanry.  It  impresses  nobody  to  the 
purpose.  If  it  is  genuine,  it  is  the  equivalent  of  an 
application.  It  hints  at  the  reserved  power  of  truth. 
The  preacher  is  overawed  by  his  own  vision.  He  feels 
truth  so  profoundly,  that  he  turns  from  men,  and  throws 
back  the  work  of  admonishing  them  upon  God.  Are 
not  ejaculatory  prayers  to  God,  if  they  are  not  profane, 
among  the  most  affecting  expressions  of  appeal  to  men  ? 
So  of  a  closing  prayer  in  a  sermon :  it  may  be,  as  an 
indirect  appeal  to  hearers,  like  the  cry  of  a  drowning 
man  for  divine  mercy. 


LKC1-.  XXXV.]    CONCLUSION  :  APPLICATIONS  OMITTED.     4^9 

It  is  evident  that  these  are  apparent  exceptions  only 
to  the  general  rule,  which  demands  intense  applications 
of  truth  in  preaching. 

2d,  But  a  real  exception  occurs.  When  the  subject 
of  discourse  is  one  on  which  solemn  application  is  the 
usage  of  the  pulpit,  and  when  the  discussion  points  to 
a  hackneyed  application  as  the  only  natural  one,  it  may 
be  well  to  omit  all  application. 

(1)  Some  themes  are  most  naturally  treated  in  one 
way,  and  only  one.  They  lead  to  one  conclusion ;  they 
reach  it  by  one  avenue  of  discussion ;  they  culminate 
in  one  strain  of  exhortation.  Yet  they  are  standard 
themes  of  the  pulpit,  and  must  not  be  ignored. 

(2)  Consequently  the  very  announcement  of  such 
a  subject  predicts  the  whole  story  to  the  hearers.  They 
know  all  that  is  coming.  They  have  never  been  sur- 
prised by  any  variation  of  either  the  discussion  or  its 
uses.  In  such  a  case  it  may  be  breath  wasted  to 
reiterate  the  hackneyed  application  in  their  hearing. 
Disappoint,  then,  the  expectation  which  renders  that 
application  useless.  (The  value  of  the  soul,  the  duty 
of  repentance,  the  certainty  of  death  are  themes  of 
this  kind.  J  Who  ever  heard  a  novel  appeal  on  these 
themes?  Who  can  make  one?  A  hearer  of  good 
memory  can  recite  as  glibly  as  the  preacher  the  one 
trite  hortation  by  which  these  subjects  are  naturally 
applied.  Close  the  discussion,  then,  without  an  applica- 
tion. Withhold  the  inference,  the  remark,  the  appeal. 
Assume  that  the  hearer's  conscience  is  preaching.  Sur- 
prise.  him  by  your  silence,  since  you  can  not  do  it  by 
your  originality.  Excite  the  inquiry,  "Why  did  not 
the  preacher  exhort  me  as  usual  ?  "  Conscience  often 
needs  quickening  by  something  that  is  not  usual. 
Novelty  itself,  and  because  it  is  novelty,  sometimes 
turns  ths  trembling  scale  of  motive. 


iOO  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING        [user.  xxxT. 

(3)  Conversion  is  often  a  work  of  great  delicacy,  as 
it  respects  the  adjustment  of  means  to  end  and  of 
motives  to  action.  Painters  say  that  their  art  involves 
A  delicacy  of  conception  and  of  execution  which  they 
3an  not  explain  to  a  critic.  It  intermingles  intuition 
with  skill  in  a  way  which  nothing  but  prolonged  prac- 
tice enables  them  to  understand  in  themselves.  Simi- 
lar is  the  work  of  preaching,  in  that  close  encounter 
with  the  wills  of  men  in  which  their  conversion  maj' 
hang  on  the  utterance  of  a  moment,  or,  as  probably,  on 
the  silence  of  that  moment.  The  law  of  the  Holy 
Spirit's  working  often  involves  this  intricate  operation 
of  his  chosen  instrument. 

In  powerful  revivals,  when  sensibilities  are  wrought 
up  by  sympathy,  and  multitudes  are  hovering  around 
the  act  of  critical  decision,  the  burden  of  one  breath 
may  win  a  soul,  or  repulse  a  soul.  Then  the  absence  of 
an  appeal  when  an  appeal  is  expected,  and  planned  for, 
and  forestalled,  may  be  the  one  untried  expedient 
which  shall  result  in  a  soul's  conversion.  Rarely 
adopted,  this  expedient  may  transfer  the  work  of  the 
pulpit  to  the  conscience  of  the  hearer.  A  roused  con- 
science never  speaks  a  hackneyed  word. 

3d,  These  remarks  suggest,  further,  that  both  the 
real  and  the  apparent  exceptions  to  the  general  princi- 
ple before  us  depend  for  their  impressiveness  on  the  ^ 
infrequency  of  their  occurrence.  They  can  not  be  , 
genuine  if  they  are  frequent.  Habitually  employed, 
they  take  on  the  look  either  of  trickery  or  of  insensi- 
bility. Hearers  receive  them  either  as  stolid  expedients 
or  as  a  solemn  way  of  imposing  on  them. 

For  example,  one  of  the  most  spiritless  of  all  modes 
of  closing  a  sermon  is  that  which  was  common  at  one 
time  in  the  pulpit  of  Scotland,  and  was  imported  to 


iJKrr.  XXXV.]    CONCLUSION:    APPLICATIONS  OMITTED.     601 

Bome  extent  into  tliis  country,  —  chat  of  repeating  tho 
Christian  benediction,  or  the  doxology.  This  was 
closuig  with  prayer.  When  this  was  an  original,  and  of 
course  a  rare  outburst  of  the  preacher's  emotion,  it  may 
have  been  often  tlie  cuhnination  of  power  in  a  sermon. 
Rarely;^  imitated  now,  it  would  be  impressive.  But 
Bome  preachers  have  rarely  adopted  any  other  ending. 
Thus  abused,  the  expedient  becomes  flat.  Routine  is 
in  no  other  form  so  flat  as  in  forms  of  prayer.  Prayer 
is  nowhere  else  so  void  of  meaning  as  where  it  seems 
foisted  in  as  a  convenience.  When  it  forms  the  stereo- 
typed close  of  a  sermon,  it  is  only  saying  by  indirection 
in  a  religious  way  what  it  would  not  be  profane  to  say 
directly,  —  that  the  hour  is  ended.  The  Rev.  Dr.  James 
Wilson  of  Philadelphia  used  to  preach  just  one  hour 
by  the  clock,  no  more,  no  less.  At  the  instant  when 
the  hour-hand  pointed  to  twelve  o'clock,  he  would  stop 
short,  and  say,  "  Brethren,  the  hour  is  up.  Let  us  pray." 
This  was  bald ;  but,  as  a  uniform  formula,  it  was  not  so 
unmeaning  as  the  benediction  would  have  been  in  its 
place. 

I  once  heard  the  lats^Rev.  Dr.  Guthrie  of  Edinburgh, 
preach  a  sermon  which  was  to  be  followed  by  another 
appointment,  for  which  his  name  was  announced,  in 
another  part  of  the  city.  He  was  pressed  for  time. 
During  the  latter  part  of  the  discourse  he  frequently 
eyed  his  watch,  and  evidently  preached  in  a  hurry.  At 
the  close  he  had  less  than  ten  minutes  in  which  to  cross 
the  city.  He  drew  out  his  watch  nervously,  and,  with 
watch  in  hand  and  his  eye  upon  it,  he  exploded  the 
customary  formula  of  the  benediction :  "  Grace  be  unto 
you  from  God  the  Father  and  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
Amen ! "  Almost  before  the  last  word  had  left  his  lipa 
he  shot  down  the  pulpit-stairs  like  a  rocket.     I  had 


602  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       [user   xxxv 

before  seen  a  priest  take  his  pinch  of  snuff  in  the  midst 
of  the  celebration  of  high  mass;  but  that  was  not  so 
revolting  as  the  benediction  and  the  leap  of  the  Scotch 
divine. 

Here  let  us  observe,  in  the  way  of  an  excursus  from 
the  topic  now  before  us,  the  true  office  and  significance 
of  the  benediction  in  the  service  of  prayer.  A  special 
reason  exists,  in  the  very  nature  of  it,  for  not  using  it  as 
a  form  of  homiletic  conclusion.  It  is  the  only  act  of 
clerical  prerogative,  except  the  administration  of  the 
ordinances,  in  which  the  idea  of  clerical  mediatorship  is 
retained.  The  sacerdotal  theory  of  it  does  no  harm  to 
either  preacher  or  people.  Let  it  be  reserved  as  an  act 
of  clerical  intercession  for  the  whole  service.  There  it 
is  in  its  place.  There  it  becomes  often  the  coronation 
of  the  devout  feelings  of  the  hour. 

I  have  said  that  the  sacerdotal  theory  of  it  can  do  no 
evil.  Looking  at  it  with  no  bias  derived  from  the  his- 
tory of  the  sacerdotal  theory  of  the  clerical  office  in 
other  respects,  I  find  in  it  a  reality,  which,  call  it  what 
we  may,  meets  a  certain  natural  craving  in  the  hearts 
of  a  worshiping  assembly.  Often  the  final  effect  of 
public  worship,  with  its  accompaniment  of  song  and 
sermon,  and  rehearsal  of  God's  word,  is  to  excite  a  pro- 
found sense  of  dependence,  of  which  a  craving  for  the 
blessing  of  a  "  man  of  God  "  is  the  natural  sequence. 
The  intervention  of  a  solitary  human  voice  between 
the  silent  assembly  and  God,  speaking  in  his  name,  and 
pronouncing  his  blessing  upon  them,  becomes  a  relief 
to  their  wrought-up  emotions.  They  feel  the  natural- 
ness of  it.  They  volunteer  to  clothe  it  with  the  au- 
thority of  their  own  devotional  desires.  It  is  an  act 
In  which  the  preacher  is  not  as  other  men.  He  is  in- 
Vested  by  the  wants  of  the  people  with  mediatorial 


/ 


LECi    XXXV.]    CONCLUSION :  APPLICATIONS  OMITTED.     608 

office.  He  is  an  intercessor  by  divine  appointment  and 
by  popular  choice.  The  people  will  have  it  so.  They 
are  assisted  by  it  in  their  own  devotions,  if  no  heredi- 
tary iconoclasm  disturbs  the  natural  working  of  their 
devout  feelings.  Did  not  the  assembly  at  Enfield, 
under  the  preaching  of  Edwards,  probably  feel  this? 
Have  we  not  all  been  sensible  of  it  in  the  services  of 
the  Lord's  house,  when  they  have  been  conducted  by  a 
preacher  whose  character  as  a  man  awakened  in  us  the 
reverence  which  his  office  claimed  ?  Has  it  not  been  a 
joy  to  bow  the  head,  and  receive  a  benediction  from 
one  whose  office  has  given  a  unique  significance  to  the 
act? 

The  popular  nomenclature  by  which  th«  clergy  have 
been  designated  from  time  immemorial  also  indicates 
the  genuineness  of  this  view  of  them  in  the  popular 
conception.  Why  is  a  minister  of  religion  called  a 
''divine,"  a  "man  of  God"  ?  Why  is  the  title  "Rev- 
erend" prefixed  to  his  name?  Why  does  the  very 
dwelling  in  which  he  lives  receive  a  name  —  "  parson- 
age," "manse,"  "rectory" — not  given  to  the  dwellings 
of  other  dignitaries?  Why  does  the  popular  taste, 
when  not  sophisticated  by  the  ultraisms  of  democracy, 
always  feel  the  propriety  of  some  simple  badge  of  dress, 
which  shall  make  a  clergyman  always  known  as  such? 
The  idea  of  the  separateness  of  the  elergy  from  the  rest 
of  the  world,  and,  in  some  sense,  of  their  mediatorship 
between  God  and  men,  is  expressed  by  these  incidents 
to  the  clerical  office. 

Are  these  things  relics  of  Romish  corruption  ?  Why, 
then,  has  not  Protestant  iconoclasm,  admitted  to  have 
been  extreme  in  some  other  things,  succeeded  in  up- 
rooting these  tastes  from  the  popular  mind?  If  they 
had  not  some  real  basis  in  human  nature,  the  fire  to 


fir04  THE   THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       [lbct.  xxxt. 

which  they  have  been  subjected  through  three  hundred 
years  of  polemic  reform  should  surely  have  burnt  them 
out  by  this  time.  Yet  there  they  are,  as  fresh  and  as 
prompt  to  express  themselves  as  they  were  when  the 
people  of  Israel  said  to  Moses,  "Speak  thou  with  ub, 
and  we  will  hear,  but  let  not  God  speak  with  us  lest 
we  die." 

Time  has  indeed  wrought  revolutionary  changes  in 
the  ancient  theory  of  worship.  We  will  not  ignore 
them.  But  it  has  not  destroyed,  nor  essentially  im- 
paired, that  instinct  of  human  nature  which  exalts  a 
teacher  of  religion  above  other  men,  and  often  invests 
his  service  with  a  mediatorial  significance.  The  one 
thing  in  the  public  worship  of  the  sanctuary  in  which 
our  Congregational  severity  recognizes  that  instinct, 
and  in  which  the  people,  if  left  alone  to  follow  their 
religious  intuitions,  will  cordially  obey  it,  is  this  act 
of  pastoral  benediction.  We  are  in  no  danger  of  an 
abuse  of  it  in  the  direction  of  sacerdotal  arrogance. 
We  can  not  afford  to  spare  it.  It  is  not  wise  to  sacri- 
fice it  to  ecclesiastical  theory.  Human  nature  craves  it, 
and  in  some  form  will  have  it.  For  the  want  of  it,  and 
some  things  kindred  to  it,  Congregational  and  Presby- 
terian churches  are  losing  their  hold  upon  certain  mate- 
rials in  the  constituency  of  churches,  which  by  hereditary 
afi&nities  belong  to  them.  Let  us  retain  this  clerical 
benediction,  then,  in  the  simple  and  natural  form  in 
which  even  iconoclastic  democracy  has  left  it.  Let  us 
not  transform  it  fsom  official  benediction  to  mere  inter- 
cession. Above  all,  let  us  not  reduce  its  level  in  the 
popular  esteem  by  making  it  a  rhetorical  expedient  for 
the  ending  of  a  sermon.  This,  if  done  often,  will  often 
be  done  with  a  vacant  mind ;  and  in  no  other  form  of 
public  worship  can  we  more  offensively  take  God's 
aame  in  vain. 


tacT.  XXXV. J    CONCLUSION:  COMPACT  API LICATIONS.     505 


V.  The  fifth  general  topic  in  the  discussion  of  con 
elusions  is  the  inquiry,  "  Which  is  the  superior,  —  the 
continuous  application  in  the  body  of  the  sermon,  or 
the  compact  application  at  the  close  ?  "  The  answer  is 
involved  in  the  following  particulars. 

1st,  The  compact  application  at  the  close  is  fre- 
quently demanded  by  the  logical  necessities  of  the 
discussion.  We  have  before  observed,  that  the  logical 
necessities  of  an  argument  often  forbid  the  weakening 
of  a  conclusion  by  anticipation  of  its  materials.  The 
same  principle  often  forbids  the  dispensing  with  an  ap- 
plicatory  ending  for  the  sake  of  a  continuous  applica- 
tion through  the  body  of  the  sermon.  An  argument 
incomplete  often  can  not  logically  be  applied  to  any 
thing  of  homiletic  use.  The  practical  uses  of  a  syllo- 
gism may  all  lie  in  its  conclusion,  not  in  either  premise. 
If,  in  such  a  case,  the  continuous  application  is  at- 
tempted, the  process  will  be  forced.  It  will  not  be 
attempted  by  a  logical  mind. 

2d,  The  compact  application  at  the  close  is  the  more 
natural  to  a-ny  elaborate  discussion.  Be  it  argumen- 
tative or  not,  an  elaborate  discussion  demands  continu- 
ity of  attention  to  the  thing  in  hand.  It  is  unnatural 
to  break  such  a  train  of  thought  for  the  sake  of  an 
appeal  to  the  sensibilities  of  hearers.  If  such  an  appeal 
be  made,  and  be  successful,  what  is  the  effect?  The 
hearer's  mind  drops  from  the  labor  of  intellectual  ten- 
sion to  the  luxury  of  emotional  relaxation.  The  toil  of 
thinking  gives  place  to  that  which  we  so  significan  tly 
call  the  -^^play"  of  feeling.  So  far  the  transition  is 
easy;  but  how  shall  we  secure  the  return  to  severe 
thinking  which  an  elaborate  discussion  requires? 
"  Facilis  descensus  —  sed  revocare  !  " 

It  is  often  said,  however,  in  defense  of  the  continit 


.2 


506  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHIPTQ.       \jjsct   xxxt. 

ous  application,  that  intellect  and  sensibility  are  mutual 
tributaries.  Transition,  therefore,  from  the  one  kind  of 
excitemeat  to  the  other,  is  helpful  to  both.  "Weave 
discourse,  then,"  is  the  advice,  "  with  both  the  intellec- 
tual and  the  emotive  threads ;  ply  back  and  forth  from 
discussion  to  hortation,  and  from  hortation  to  discus- 
sion, like  a  shuttle  in  a  loom."  The  principle  here 
involved  is  true  only  of  the  inferior  kinds  and  degrees 
of  intellectual  and  emotive  excitement.  Severe  thought^ 
and  intense  feeling  both  tend  to  continuity^  jLot.^ to 
^apid  interchanges.  Severe  thought  is  iron  in  its 
tenacity:  intense  feeling  is  iron  red-hot.  Neither  is 
flexible  like  a  thread  of  tow :  neither  can  be  woven  as 
with  a  shuttle.  Mental  oscillation  is  natural,  only 
when  the  mind  is  at  play  on  the  surfaces  of  thoughts. 
It  is  natural  where  feeling  of  no  profound  degree  is 
concerned.  An  audience  may  be  moved  from  mirth  to 
sympathy,  or  from  tears  to  smiles,  all  the  more  readily 
for  the  contrast,  but  never  from  anguish  to  ecstasy,  or 
from  ecstasy  to  anguish,  in  rapid  oscillation.  Edward 
Everett  was  once  censured  for  even  entertaining  with 
an  elaborate  classical  metaphor  an  audience  assembled 
to  provide  relief  for  Ireland  in  the  time  of  famine. 
Imagine  that  his  offense  had  been  an  attempt  to  amuse 
the  audience  with  a  jest !  An  impassioned  audience  is 
in  no  mood  for  the  play  of  contrasted  emotions.  Stni 
less  natural  is  oscillation  between  impassioned  feeling 
and  severe  thinking.     These  run  in  grooves. 

This  view  is  confirmed  by  the  structure  of  discourse 
adopted  in  the  best  examples  of  secular  eloquence.  A 
speech  by  Edmund  Burke,  by  Lord  Brougham,  by 
Daniel  Webster,  may  be  enlivened  by  descriptions,  by 
sallies  of  wit,  by  historic  narrative,  by  classic  iUustra- 
tion,  but  rarely  b}'  fragmentary  and  interspersed  ap 


LKOT.  XXXV.]    CONCLUSION  :  COMPACT  APPLICATIONS.     607 

peals.  Argumentative  appeals  may  occur:  but  per- 
suasive application  is  reserved  till  the  close.  Such  was 
also  the  Greek  and  the  Roman  ideal  of  the  peroration. 

3d,  The  compact  application  at  the  close  is  the  more 
favorable  to  concentrated  impression.  Continuous  ap- 
plication, whatever  be  its  advantages,  must  have  this 
incidental  drawback,  that  it  divides  force. 

(1)  Delay  often  reduplicates  the  force  of  application 
when  it  comes.  The  resources  of  it  accumulate  by 
delay  on  the  preacher's  side :  the  recipient  demand  for 
it  is  intensified  by  delay  on  the  hearer's  side.  The 
very  calmness  with  which  a  preacher  explains  a  stu- 
pendous truth,  proves  a  fearful  conclusion,  illustrates 
an  overpowering  alternative,  without  a  word  expressive 
of  its  sway  over  his  own  sensibilities,  —  except  the  in- 
evitable hints  of  his  reserved  emotion,  which  he  can 
not  repress,  —  will  work,  by  the  mere  contrast  of  still- 
ness with  energy,  upon  the  responding  sensibilities  of 
the  hearer.  Feeling  will  rise  and  swell,  and  gather 
volume,  till  at  length  an  appeal  from  the  preacher, 
urging  to  executive  expression,  will  be  welcomed  as  a 
relief. 

(2)  JFurthe3LLJDjaiicentrated  impression  is  often  the 
only  possible  impression.  The  pulpit  is  peculiar  in  the 
conditions  of  its  work  in  two  respects.  It  must  address 
a  vast  amount  of  spiritually  torpid  mind ;  and  its  most 
necessary  materials  grow  stale  by  repetition.  From 
these  conditions  there  is  no  escape.  Concentration  of 
force,  therefore,  is  often  the  forlorn  hope  of  success. 
Brief,  sharp,  condensed  processes,  from  beginning  to 
end,  are  among  the  only  possible  expedients  of  impres- 
sion. Weight,  not  bulk  of  appeal,  becomes  the  test  of 
value. 

4th,  The    compact  application  at  the  «lose  is  the 


508  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHINQ.       [leot.  xxxv. 

more  secure  against  the  danger  of  exhausting  the  -fieii»^^ 
sibilities  of  hearers.  Nothing  else  is  so  flat  as  an  appeal 
which  moves  nob)dy.  Hearers  are  often  injured  by 
applications  of  truth  which  fall  upon  exhausted  sensi- 
bilit-es.  Exhausted  feeling,  under  such  conditions, 
borders  hard  upon  disgusted  feeling. 

This  suggests  an  excursus  from  the  topic  immediately 
before  us,  on  the  duty  of  the  pulpit  to  those  who  are 
repelled  from  its  message  by  some  of  its  methods. 

Religious  effort  in  all  its  departments  has  among 
its  fruits  an  unwritten  volume  of  disgust.  This  sug- 
gested to  Jiohn  Foster  his  celebrated  essay  on  "The 
aversion  of  men  of  taste  to  evangelical  religion."  We 
know  but  a  small  fragment  of  that  aversion  within  our 
own  ecclesiastical  borders.  The  apparent  successes 
of  ill-timed  and  unphilosophical  expedients  of  useful- 
ness we  know.  Success,  or  the  resemblance  of  it,  in 
any  thing,  trumpets  itself.  But  we  do  not  hear  much 
of  its  cost  in  the  deadened  sensibilities,  and  disgusted 
tastes,  and  contemptuous  judgments,  and  acrid  enmities, 
and  silent  departures,  which  they  occasion.  Men  thus 
affected  by  unwise  policies  of  the  pulpit  go  out  from 
us,  and  that  is  the  last  we  hear  of  them. 

Say  what  we  may  of  the  weakness,  or  the  guilt  if 
yo'j.  please  to  call  it  such,  of  those  who  permit  them- 
selves to  be  repelled  from  truth  by  such  causes ;  yet 
they  have  on  their  side  of  the  question  some  powerful 
allies.  They  are  supported  by  those  auxiliaries  to  con- 
science which  high  culture  creates  in  the  ultimate 
stages  of  civilization.  The  equipoise  of  a  well-balanced 
mind,  the  intuitions  of  good  taste,  the  instincts  of  refined 
sensibility,  the  craving  of  intelligence  for  thoughtful 
discourse,  and  that  tendency  to  reticence  which  apper- 
tains to  all  deep  emotion  in  strong  characters  on  sacred 


LKCi   xxAV.]   CONCLUSION :  COMPACT  APPLICATIONS.     609 

themes,  —  these  are  auxiliaries  to  conscience  which 
Christianity  itself  develops,  and  without  which  it  can 
not  achieve  its  ultimate  conquests.  Yet  these  are  all 
on  the  side  of  these  disgusted  ones,  and  plead  for  them 
when  they  go  out  from  Christian  churches,  repelled  by 
the  vagaries  of  a  weak  or  an  ignorant  pulpit. 

An  educated  pulpit  is  inexcusable  in  a  crude  and 
rude  policy  towards  these  "Martyrs  of  Disgust," 
because  it  is  filled  by  men  who  ought  to  study  wiser 
methods  of  procedure.  An  educated  ministry  ought 
to  be  able  to  do,  not  only  best  things,  but  in  best  ways. 
They  ought  to  be  able  to  reach  the  lower  classes  of 
society  without  resorting  to  expedients  which  necessa- 
rily repel  the  higher  classes.  Their  range  of  policy 
should  be  so  broad  as  to  cover  the  wants  of  all  classes. 

We  should  not  content  ourselves  with  wasteful  ways 
of  doing  a  little  good.  The  cost  of  religious  usefulness 
is  to  be  taken  account  of,  like  the  cost  of  any  other 
human  effort.  Laws  of  spiritual  success  are  as  inflexi- 
ble as  those  of  nature.  That  is,  therefore,  a  needless 
waste  which  aims  to  reach  rude  minds  at  the  expense  of 
repelling  cultured  minds.  That  is  an  unwise  policy 
which  strives  to  win  ignorance  and  coarseness  by  meth- 
ods of  preaching  which  are  intrinsically  fitted  to  alienate 
learning  and  taste.  Specially  is  that  an  uninstructed 
conscierce  which  impels  a  man  to  modes  of  moving  the 
sensibilities  of  inferior  minds,  which  good  sense  pro- 
nounces repulsive  to  their  superiors.  The  divine 
metliod  of  working  involves  no  such  separation  of 
classes.  It  denies  the  necessity  of  the  repulsion  of  one 
class  for  the  salvation  of  another.  It  always  looks 
towards,  and  in  its  practice  works  towards,  the  higher 
level  rather  than  the  lower.  But  it  does  this  by  meth- 
ods which  are  intrinsically  adapted  to  both  classes,  and 
which  elevate  both. 


610  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING        [lbot.  xxxy 

An  illustration  on  a  large  scale  of  the  neglect  of  this 
law  of  divine  working  is  witnessed  to-day  in  the  pulpit 
of  Germany.  German  religious  assemblies  are  gener- 
ally composed,  in  overwhelming  proportion,  of  women 
and  children.  As  a  rule,  not  one  person  in  six  in  such 
an  assembly  is  a  man.  Multitudes  of  Germans  liave 
fallen  into  the  theoretic  belief  that  Christianity  is  fitted 
only  to  women  and  children.  If  the  theory  reflects 
upon  their  estimate  of  their  mothers  and  wives  and 
daughters,  the  German  pulpit  is  largely  responsible 
for  it.  Such  a  degrading  conception  of  the  aim  of 
Christianity,  and  such  glaring  injustice  to  more  than 
half  the  human  race,  could  never  have  existed  under 
the  rigime  of  a  pulpit  which  did  justice  to  either.  The 
German  clergy,  as  a  body,  have  neglected  what  I  have 
elsewhere  termed  "masterly"  preaching.  They  have 
sacrificed  strong  thought,  argument,  doctrinal  preach- 
I  ing,  to  the  more  emotive  forms  of  religious  discourse* 
I  They  have  indulged  excessively  in  hortatory  preaching.; 
\As  a  consequence,  only  the  more  emotive  classes  of  j 
society  are  usually  found  in  German  churches.  Pro- 
fessor Tholuck  foresaw  this  result  twenty-five  years 
ago.  He  said  in  1855,  that,  of  the  pastors  of  Ger- 
man churches,  not  one  in  twenty  retained  his  habits 
of  study  after  obtaining  his  pastoral  charge ;  and  that 
German  preaching,  therefore,  did  not  generally  consist 
of  the  fruits  of  study.  It  was  impossible,  in  the  nature 
of  things,  he  said,  that  such  preaching  should  long 
command  the  respect  of  thinking  men.  He  did  not 
speak  of  the  separation  of  the  sexes ;  but  this  result  is 
exactly  that  in  kind  which  he  foreshadowed. 

History  is  constantly  repeating  itself  in  this  thiiig, 
and  proving  that  it  is  only  on  the  foundation  of  strong 
preaching  that  preaching  of  feebler  stock  can  sustain 


( 


LBCT.  XXXV.]    CONCLUSION  :  COMPACT  APPLICATIONS.     511 
/ 

itself{  Only  on  the  basis  of  learned  preaching  can 
ignorant  preaching  achieve  success.  J  Only  by  the  sup 
port  of  argumentative  preaching  can  hortatory  preach- 
ing command  respect.  Only  when  surrounded  and  held 
\ip  by  thoughtful  and  tasteful  preaching,  to  men  of 
thought  and  cultured  tastes,  can  emotive  and  crude 
preaching  to  the  uneducated  have  any  long  or  vigorous 
life.  Only  upon  the  labors  of  studious  and  hard-work- 
ing pastors  in  their  libraries,  can  itinerant  evangelists 
in  the  pulpit  command  the  hearing  which  they  often  J 
receive  from  excited  crowds.  ^ 

Returning  to  the  topic  immediately  before  us,  I 
would  bring  the  weight  of  these  fundamental  truths  to 
enforce  the  superiority  of  the  compact  over  the  con- 
tinuous application,  by  the  fact  that  it  is  less  liable  to 
the  danger  of  exhausting,  and  thus  disgusting,  the  sensi- 
bilities of  hearers.  This  is  the  great  peril  of  a  horta- 
tory sermon. 

We  are  slow  to  believe  that  men  have  none  too  much 
power  of  feeling.  No  man  has  any  sensibility  to  waste. 
Sensibility  is  not  the  ultimate  faculty  of  our  being.  It 
is  a  tributary.  It  is  the  motive  force  to  executive 
action^..  The  supreme  faculty  is  will.  To  work  upon 
sensibility  monotonously,  leaving  the  will  no  chance  to 
throw  itself  into  executive  duty,  is  the  surest  way  to 
benumb  sensibility.  Pain  itself  becomes  at  last  anaes- 
thetic to  tortured  nerves.  They  die  of  pain.  So  the 
moral  sensibilities  grow  torpid  under  extreme  and  rude 
appliances  which  do  not  leave  them  at  the  right  mo* 
ment  to  do  their  own  work  silently  upon  the  will. 
A  wise  preacher,  therefore,  will  be  wise  in  this,  using 
discreetly  the  sensibilities  of  an  audience.  )He  will 
apply  truth,  as  a  soldier  fires  who  has  but  a  limited 
amount  of  ammunition.  Frequency  of  shot  ia  less  ta 
be  regarded  than  efficiencyxpf  shot. 

" \ 


512  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.       [lect.  xxxt. 

This  economy  of  sensibilities  is  also  urged  by  another 
principle  which  enters  into  all  eloquence.  It  is  that  a 
hearer  is  a  participator  in  all  eloquent  speech.  Power- 
ful speech  is  always  dramatic.  An  interested  hearer 
engager  in  silent  colloquy  with  the  speaker.  Thought 
responds  to  thought ;  feeling  to  feeling.  Therefore  a 
hearer's  range  and  power  of  sensibility  are  as  much  to 
b^  taken  into  account  by  a  speaker  as  his  range  and 
power  of  intellect.  The  moment  a  hearer  ceases  to 
respond  to  the  appeals  of  a  speaker,  that  moment  he 
ceases  to  be  a  party  in  the  case.  He  becomes  a  mere 
recipient.  He  is  clogged;  he  nods.  Lord  Brougham 
accounts  for  the  failure  of  certain  parliamentary  speak- 
ers on  the  ground  that  they  shared  nothing  with  their 
hearers.     They  were  teachers,  not  orators. 

For  the  reasons  thus  far  advanced,  we  may  conclude 
that,  generally,  the  compact  application  at  the  close  is 
preferable  to  the  interspersed  application  in  the  body 
of  the  sermon.  But  the  general  rule  is  subject  to  ex- 
ceptions. 

5th,  It   should  be  observed,  therefore,  that  certain 

forms   of  discussion   may   require,   and   certain   other 

ll      \^^forms  may  admit  of,  the  continuous  application. 

.  \a:  "      X(l)  Some  discussions  require  the  continuous  applica- 

^  tion.     A  hortatory  discussion,  for  instance,  is  nearly  all 

applicatory. 

(2)  Some  discussions,  though  not  requiring,  may 
adm\t  of,  the  continuous  application.  An  expository 
discussion  which  is  not  severely  critical  is  one  cf  this 
class.  In  such  a  sermon  the  train  of  thought  is  secured 
in  place  by  the  text.  If  dropped  for  the  sake  of  an 
applicatory  appeal,  it  may  easily  be  resumed.  A  bio- 
graphical or  historical  discussion  admits  of  a  similar 
freedom  of  interplay.    Such  a  sermon  will  commonly 


IBOT   XZX^ 


.]  CONCLUSION:  CONTINUOUS  APFLICATIONS.  513 


follow  either  the  order  of  biblical  narrative,  or  tho 
wder  of  time.  Either  of  these,  if  suspended,  is  easily 
recovered.  A  discourse  of  peculiar  intensity  of  practi- 
cal bearing  may  branch  out  naturally  into  a  succession 
of  appeals.  Instances  occur  in  which  practical  applica- 
tion grows  out  of  the  very  roots  of  a  text  or  a  theme. 
The  applications  are  immediate,  obvious,  urgent.  Not 
to  make  them  would  do  violence  to  the  natural  uses  of 
the  subject.  The  oratorical  instinct  of  the  preacher 
allies  itself  with  the  instinct  of  hearing  in  the  audience, 
to  demand  the  utterance  of  them.  The  sermon  is  most 
naturally  made  up  of  a  series  of  touches  of  discussion, 
alternating  with  touches  of  application.  It  is  con* 
structed  like  a  Norway  spruce,  which  is  bearded  with 
branches  to  the  very  ground. 

6th,  Exceptions  to  the  general  rule  of  compact  appli- 
cation may  be  created  by  peculiarity  of  occasion.  An 
occasion  of  unusual  religious  excitement  may  demand 
exception.  A  state  of  ebullient  emotion  on  the  part 
of  an  audience  demands  something  responsive  to  such 
emotion  from  the  pulpit.  The  principle  always  holds 
good,  that  existing  excitement  should  be  used.  The 
iron  must  be  struck  while  it  is  hot. 

Hence  it  is,  that,  in  revivals  of  religion,  hortation 
will  be  useful  in  larger  proportion  than  when  a  commu- 
nity is  at  a  dead  level.  In  revivals  delicate  junctures 
of  influence  abound.  Critical  moments  occur  in  the 
delivery  of  a  sermon,  for  which  no  premeditation 
can  provide.  The  oratorical  instinct  must  be  largely 
trusted.  A  direct  appeal  in  the  midst  of  a  discussion 
may  then  be  the  instrument  of  a  soul's  conversion. 
No  theory  of  art  in  preaching  must  be  permitted  to 
tyrannize  over  the  liberty  of  speech  at  such  moments. 
The  late  Rev.  Dr.  Kirk  once  told  me  that  he  thought 


614  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.       [lkot.  xxxt. 

he  could  commonly  judge,  by  certain  indefinable  evi- 
dences, of  the  condition  of  an  audience,  when  they  were, 
and  when  they  were  not,  moved  responsively  to  the 
emotion  of  the  preacher  so  as  to  invite  or  to  reject 
interspersed  appeal.  Not  every  man's  judgment  can  be 
implicitly  trusted  on  a  point  of  such  delicacy ;  bat  one 
who  has  had  experience  in  addressing  assemblies  under 
religious  awakening  may  have  a  discernment  which 
shall  equal  intuition. 

7th,  Exceptions  to  the  general  rule  of  compact  appli- 
cation may  be  required  by  the  intellectual  character  of 
the  audience.  An  audience  of  children  may  need  the 
continuous  application.  Why?  Because  they  have 
little  power  of  sustained  attention,  and  almost  no  power 
of  abstraction.  On  the  same  principle,  an  audience 
composed  i/iainly  of  undisciplined  minds  may  have  the 
same  need. 

These  remarks  upon  exceptions  to  the  general  rule 
suggest  a  threefold  principle  which  obviously  under- 
lies such  exceptions,  and  with  the  statement  of  which 
we  close  this  part  of  the  discussion.  It  is,  that  the  less 
elaborate  the  sermon,  or  the  less  cultivated  the  audi- 
ence, or  the  more  emotive  the  condition  of  the  audi- 
ence, the  more  readily  is  the  continuous  application 
admitted  or  required. 


LECTURE   XXXVI. 
rHB  conclusion:    eadical  elements,  bbcapitula* 

TION,  INFERENCE  AND  REMABK. 

VI.  Proceeding  now  to  examine  more  narrowly  the 
compact  application  at  the  close  of  a  discourse,  we  are 
led  to  inquire,  in  the  sixth  place,  "  What  are  the  radV 
cal  elements  of  a  conclusion  ?  " 

1st,  Ancient  oratory  recognized  two  such  elements, 
recapitulation  and  appeal.  Either  or  both  were  deemed 
fitting  to  popular  discourse. 

2d,  To  these  two  elements  of  the  conclusion  the 
usage  of  the  pulpit  adds  a  third,  —  inference,  or  remark. 
On  what  grounds  has  the  pulpit  originated  this  feature 
of  appKcatory  discussion? 

(1)  The  foundation  of  it  lies  in  the  intense  practi- 
calness of  the  work  of  preaching.  Preaching,  in  the 
high  ideal  of  it,  never  discusses  truth  for  the  sake  of 
discussion ;  never  illustrates  truth  for  the  sake  of  dis- 
play :  it  is  aimed  at  uses.  The  homiletic  instinct  is 
to  put  it  to  as  large  a  range  of  uses  as  possible.  The 
inference,  or  remark,  is  a  silent  witness,  so  far  as  it 
goes,  to  the  fidelity  of  the  pulpit  in  reaching  after  the 
practical  usefulness  of  preaching. 

(2)  This  is  seen  in  the  fact  that  the  use  of  the  infer- 
ence, or  remark,  brings  to  practical  bearings  a  large 
range  of  abstract  themes  which  can  not  be  applied  in 

61f 


516  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,      [lect.  xxxvi 

any  other  way.  The  pulpit  gives  proof  of  its  intel 
lectual  dignity  in  the  fact  that  it  discusses  themes  more 
profound  than  secular  eloquence  ever  ventures  to  pro- 
duce before  a  popular  audience.  They  are  themes,  the 
practical  bearings  of  which  are  developed  wholly  by 
inferences  drawn  from  them,  and  remarks  suggested 
by  them.  In  themselves  they  are  aerial  in  their  height 
above  the  level  of  human  interests.  Note  as  exam- 
ples of  such  elemental  themes,  the  Deity  of  Christ, 
the  Nature  of  the  Atonement,  the  Personality  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Without  these,  the  gospel  is  a  nullity ; 
yet  they  reach  their  practical  uses  only  through  infer- 
ential processes.  In  themselves  they  can  be  discussed 
with  exactest  logic,  without  touching  a  conscience,  or 
moving  a  heart ;  but,  by  inference  from  them,  truths  of 
richest  and  sweetest  flavor  flow  out  to  every  conscience 
and  every  heart.  Thus  treated,  the  most  scholastic 
doctrines  of  theology  become  the  most  practical. 

(3)  The  inference  and  remark  often  aid  the  useful- 
ness of  preaching  by  exhibiting  the  practical  bearings 
of  truth  in  climactic  order.  Truths  in  a  series  admit 
always  of  climax  in  impression.  The  closing  para- 
graphs of  a  sermon,  therefore,  often  concentrate  in  a 
rapid  rise  of  interest  the  practical  uses  of  an  entire 
discussion.  Mental  ascent  from  a  lower  to  a  higher 
level  of  interest  is  exhilarating. 

(4)  The  inference  and  remark  are  valuable  as  a  de- 
vice for  disclosing  the  prolific  nature  of  truth  in  re- 
Bources  of  practical  application.  Force  of  impression 
is  often  gained  by  multiplicity  of  points  of  impression. 
The  great  object  of  preaching  is  to  bring  the  gospel 
home  to  real  life  by  showing  at  how  many  points  it 
touches  real  life.  A  sense  of  the  omnipresence  of  truth 
Is  thus  quickened.    Hence  the  pulpit  has  by  intuition 


LECT.  xxxvT.]    CONCLUSION :   RADICAL  ELEMENTS.  617 

seized  upon  the  inference  and  remark  as  a  most  natural 
device  of  sacred  oratory. 

(5)  Inferences  also  aid  impression  by  presenting  a 
practical  truth  through  the  logical  process.  A  truth 
inferred  is  a  truth  proved.  Practical  logic  is  the 
strongest  form  of  application.  Cavil  is  forestalled  by 
the  momentum  of  argument. 

(6)  Inferences  often  assist  impression  by  introdu' 
cing  truth  unexpectedly.  Hearers  concede  the  process 
of  discussion  without  foreseeing  the  results.  Says  Dr. 
Emmons,  "  I  usually  brought  in  those  truths  which 
are  most  displeasing  to  the  human  heart  by  way  of 
inference.  This  I  often  found  to  be  the  best  method 
to  silence  and  convince  gainsayers." 

(7)  Inferences  and  remarks  promote  impression  by 
inviting  the  hearer's  participation  in  the  process  of 
application.  A  truth  inferred  invites  a  hearer  to  per- 
form the  process  of  inference  in  his  own  mind.  A  re- 
mark naturally  suggested  by  a  subject  invites  a  hearer 
to  test  mentally  the  naturalness  of  the  suggestion. 
The  freedom  of  the  Methodist  usage  of  public  worship, 
which  permits  the  hearer  to  give  vent  to  his  own  emo- 
tions awakened  by  the  voice  of  the  preacher,  has  this 
to  say  in  its  defense,  that  it  is  grounded  in  the  nature 
of  all  eloquence.  The  reticence  of  Calvinistic  assem- 
blies is  so  far  unnatural  in  that  it  stifles  the  dramatic 
nature  of  oral  discourse,  and  tends  to  reduce  it  to 
monologue. 

Any  thing  is  valuable,  which,  without  sacrificing  a 
greater  good,  draws  the  hearer  into  the  circle  of  acti- 
vity in  the  reception  of  discourse.  Beguile  him  into 
the  habit  of  reaching  out  and  taking  the  truth  with 
his  own  hand,  and  you  second  nature  in  one  of  the 
finest  processes  of  oral  speech.    Physicians  deem  it  a 


518  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,      [lkct.  xxxn 

vital  point  gained,  if  they  can  induce  a  patient  to  co 
operate  with  remedial  prescription.  Hearers  of  the 
gospel  are  in  a  state  of  chronic  disease  in  which  their 
own  voluntary  participation  in  redemptive  counsel  is 
invaluable.  True, at  any  one  moment,  in  anyone  given 
case,  the  advantage  is  minute  and  transient.  But  the 
success  of  all  persuasive  speech  is  made  up,  in  the 
aggregate,  of  such  minutice  of  moral  influence.  (^Truth 
works  upon  mind  as  light  works  upon  vegetation. 
No  analysis  can  detect  the  increments  of  growth ;  yet 
without  such  infinitesimal  increments  there  is  no 
growth. 

These  are,  in  brief,  the  grounds  on  which  the  appli- 
catory  expedient  of  the  inference  and  remark  rests  its 
claim.  The  pulpit  has  in  the  sheer  exercise  of  good 
sense  originated  this  de^dce.  Whatever  may  be  true  of 
it  in  secular  persuasion,  preaching  needs  it  for  the  full 
use  of  its  applicatory  resources.  Of  this  the  almost 
unanimous  usage  of  the  clergy  in  elaborate  discourse 
is  conclusive  proof. 

VII.  Having,  then,  these  three  elements  of  the  clos- 
ing application,  —  the  recapitulation,  the  inference  and 
remark,  and  the  appeal, — we  proceed  to  inquire.  On 
what  principles  shall  we  select  and  combine  the  several 
elements  in  conclusions  ? 

1st,  Study  first  congruity  of  conclusion  with  discus- 
sion. 

(1)  Not  aU  discussions  admit  of  recapitulation. 
The  salient  points  of  a  discussion  may  be  so  simple 
and  so  few,  that  to  recapitulate  them  would  burden 
them  with  needless  form.  Recapitulate  a  hortatory  ser- 
mon, and  you  reduce  it  to  burlesque. 

(2)  On  the  same  principle,  the  nature  of  the  discus- 
won  may  invite  or  reject  the  inference   and  remark 


) 


t«OT   XXXVI.]    CONCLUSION:   RADICAL  ELEMENTS,  619 

A  subject  lery  prolific  of  practical  bearings  may  need 
inferences  to  develop  them.  The  same  is  true  of  sug- 
gested remarks  which  are  not  logical  inferences.  Some 
themes  abound  with  them,  others  are  less  fruitful. 

(3)  Congruity  with  the  discussion  will  also  often 
determine  the  question  of  the  use  of  an  appeal.  A  dis- 
cussion, which,  instead  of  branching  out  into  logical 
inferences,  like  the  delta  of  a  river,  converges  to  one 
burning  point  of  application,  may  demand  the  direct 
appeal  as  the  only  natural  expression  of  that  applica- 
tion. 

(4)  All  that  criticism  can  say  to  the  point  is.  Make 
the  conclusion  sympathetic  with  the  discussion.  Re- 
capitulate, infer,  remark,  appeal,  —  one  or  all,  —  as  may 
be  requisite  to  evolve  most  richly  the  applicatory  force 
which  is  latent  in  the  body  of  the  sermon. 

This  study  of  congruity  of  conclusion  with  discussion 
is  especially  needful  as  an  offset  to  the  temptation  to 
twist  subjects  to  unnatural  uses.  The  impulse  of  the 
homiletic  instinct  is  to  use  a  discussion  by  applications 
at  all  hazards.  Therefore  a  doctrine  is  sometimes  used 
in  ways  for  which  the  discussion  has  made  no  natural 
preparation.  It  is  thrust  home  as  if  by  brute  strength. 
Strict  pertinence  of  conclusion  forbids  this.  It  is  an 
artifice.  It  only  conceals  one  error  by  another.  Perti- 
nence demands  more  than  logical  congruity  between  a 
discussion  and  its  uses.  No  matter  where  the  discus- 
sion began,  it  must  end  with  that  which  is  natural  to 
the  process  which  leads  to  the  ending.  A  scion  from  a 
pear-tree,  grafted  into  a  quince-stock,  fruits  into  pears, 
not  quinces.  So  a  very  abstract  discussion  develops 
naturally  into  a  temperate  rather  than  an  intense  ap» 
plication.     Like  to  like  is  the  law. 

2d,  Study  progress  of  moral  impression.    Why  is  a 


520  THE  THEORl   OF  PREACHING,      [lect.  xxxvi. 

hortatory  sermon  frigid,  if  ended  with  inferences  ?  Be 
cause  an  appeal  is  ^er  se  more  intense  than  inference. 
Having  exhorted  throughout  the  body  of  the  discourse, 
it  is  retrogression  to  end  with  any  thing  else  than  an 
appeal.  On  the  same  principle,  recapitulation  may  be 
too  cool  a  process  to  follow  an  impassioned  argument. 
The  closing  division  of  an  argument  may  be  so  in- 
tensely wrought  that  immediate  appeal  derived  from 
that  division  only  may  be  all  that  can  make  a  crescent 
impression. 

3d,  Study  variety  of  conclusion.  The  chief  peril  of 
the  pulpit  in  applications  is  monotony  of  form.  There- 
fore do  not  always  recapitulate,  nor  always  close  with 
inferences,  nor  always  appeal.  Never  make  the  pulpit 
a  music-box  with  only  two  tunes.  Sometimes  the  most 
obvious  reason  for  not  adopting  one  method  of  conclu- 
sion in  the  afternoon  is  that  you  did  adopt  it  in  the 
morning.  In  applications  of  truth  to  the  conscience 
and  the  sensibilities,  more  than  in  any  other  process  of 
discourse,  nature  craves  variety.  It  will  bear  a  stale 
subject ;  for  that  may  be  freshened.  A  hackneyed  dis- 
cussion it  will  tolerate ;  for  that  may  be  the  most  truth- 
ful discussion.  But  humdrum  in  application  either 
indurates  or  nauseates.  What  else  is  so  flat  as  an  ex- 
hortation which  you  know  by  heart  ?  What  else  is  so 
vapid  as  any  form  of  practical  approach  which  you 
have  foreseen  from  the  beginning?  The  moral  sensi- 
bilities, above  all  others,  demand  the  stimulus  of  vari- 
ety ;  for  they  are  benumbed  by  sin,  and  stagnant  under 
the  habit  of  moral  somnolence. 

VIII.  What  qualifications  are  requisite  to  a  good 
lecapitulation? 

1st,  The  first  quality  is  brevity.  The  nature  of  reca- 
pitulation implies  this :  its  object  requires  this.    B«v»%. 


user.  XXXVI.]    CONCLUSION :   RECAPITULATION.  521 

pitulation  is  synopsis.  It  is  the  discourse  in  miniature. 
Its  object  is  to  compress  and  epitomize,  so  that  the 
hearer  shall  feel  the  whole  force  of  the  discussion  at  a 
blow.  In  such  a  syllabus  of  the  discourse  nothing  is 
pertinent  which  the  hearer  can  not  easily  carry  in  his 
memory. 

2d,  Restriction  to  foregoing  materials  is  essential  to 
a  perfect  recapitulation.  Preachers  of  loose  logical 
habits  insert  new  material  into  the  recapitulation.  If 
not  a  new  division,  an  appendix  to  the  development  of 
a  division  is  interpolated.  Imperfect  discussion  is  thus 
amended  at  the  close.  Ragged  argument  is  patched. 
Meager  illustration  is  eked  out.  This  is  unnatural: 
rhetorically  it  is  false.  Recapitulation  is  a  purely  logi- 
cal process.  It  gives  no  room  for  new  material,  or  a 
new  expansion  of  the  old.  It  should  be  conducted 
with  the  utmost  severity  of  restriction  to  the  materials 
already  presented. 

3d,  Perspicuity  is  an  essential  qualification  of  a  per- 
fect recapitulation.  Not  only  the  clearness  of  it  as  a 
specimen  of  style,  but  clearness  as  a  recapitulation,  is 
requisite.  It  should  not  possibly  be  mistaken  for  new 
material,  or  for  blundering  repetition  of  the  old.  The 
preface  which  introduces  it,  the  forms  of  its  statement, 
even  the  tones  of  voice  in  which  it  is  announced,  should 
be  such  that  an  attentive  hearer  can  not  fail  to  recognize 
it  for  what  it  is.  -  The  whole  force  of  it  is  obviously  lost 
if  it  is  obscure/  The  advantage  of  good  divisions  in  a 
sermon  comes  to  view  in  their  recapitulation.  Clear, 
compact,  forcible  divisions  fall  into  line  beautifully  in 
an  epitome  of  the  discussion.  One  of  the  most  valuable 
single  rules  for  constructing  divisions  is  so  to  frame 
them  iihat  they  can  be  easily  and  forcibly  recapitulated 
at  the  oioac. 


522  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.      [i^cT.  xxxvi 

4th,  Climactic  order  should  characterize  the  recapitn 
lation.  Generally  this  will  be  the  order  of  good  divis 
ions ;  but  if,  for  exceptional  reasons,  it  is  not,  it  should 
be  the  order  in  the  closing  rehearsal.  Climax  appears 
J  j  grandly  in  a  good  synopsis.  The  rapidity  of  its  utter- 
^  \.  ance,  the  conciseness  of  its  style,  its  compact  repro- 
duction of  the  whole  discourse  in  miniature,  may 
disclose  the  logical  energy  of  the  sermon  with  a  con- 
centration and  vividness  which  the  discussion  did  not 
possess. 

5th,  The  elegance  of  a  recapitulation  may  often  be 
enhanced  by  varying  the  language  in  which  the  divis- 
ions were  stated  in  the  body  of  the  discourse.  Variety 
of  style  is  the  natural  exponent  of  mastery  of  thought. 
It  is  especially  expressive  of  ease  of  thought.  Hence 
it  is  natural  that  recapitulation  should  often  vary  the 
forms  of  the  original  statement.  The  extent  to  which 
recapitulation  may  be  varied  in  style  is  illustrated  by 
the  fact  that  some  of  our  venerable  hymns  of  praise 
are  sermons  in  miniature.  Doddridge  often  used  to 
'  compose  a  hymn  made  up  of  the  leading  thoughts  of 
his  sermon,  and  offer  it  for  "  the  service  of  song  "  at  the 
close.  Some  of  his  discourses  now  exist  in  no  other 
form  than  that  of  hymns  for  public  worship.  The 
hymn  commencing,  "  Jesus,  I  love  thy  charming  name," 
is  one  of  those  synopses  in  metre  of  homiletic  dis- 
courses. 

But  this  suggests  a  caution  respecting  diversity  be- 
tween the  forms  of  divisions  and  those  of  the  recapitu- 
lation. It  is  that  the  elegance  of  variety  should  never 
be  sought  at  the  expense  of  perspicuity.  The  whole 
force  of  this  expedient  of  logic  depends  upon  its  being 
Been  to  be  what  it  is. 

6th,  In  extemporaneous  preaching  the  recapitulatioD 


£.B01    XXXVI.]    CONCLUSION:    INFERENCE,  REMAEK.         52B 

sh-oulj  be  thorouglily  committed  to  memory.  This  ia 
self-evident;  but  ridiculous  scenes  sometimes  occiii 
from  neglect  of  it.  Especially  if  the  force  of  recapitu- 
lation depends  upon  the  order  of  climax,  a  failure  of 
memory  is  equivalent  to  a  failure  of  logic.     The  late 

Rev.   Dr.   B of    Philadelphia    once    preached  an 

extemporaneous  sermon  in  which  he  attempted  to  re- 
capitulate his  arguments  in  the  order  of  climax.  He 
had  developed  them  to  his  satisfaction  in  the  body  of 
the  sermon,  and  then,  by  a  self-delusion  which  we  can 
all  understand,  he  assumed  that  materials  which  had 
been  so  successfully  treated  would  not  forsake  him,  and 
he  remarked  with  the  confidence  of  assured  logic,  "  We 
have  seen  that  not  only  is  this  true,  and  that  true,  and 
the  third,  the  fourth,  the  fifth  positions  also  true,  but 
we  have  seen  that  it  is  true  that  —  that  —  hm  —  that 
even  —  hm  "  —  But  it  was  in  vain ;  the  cap  of  the  cli- 
max was  no  longer  extant.  It  had  gone  the  way  of  the 
lost  arts.  His  frantic  gesture  with  the  whole  arm  aloft 
could  not  rediscover  it.  How  to  close  that  recapitula- 
tion was  the  agony  of  the  moment.  "  Well,  doctor,  how 
did  you  close  it?"  his  friend  inquired.  "Oh,  I  in- 
vented some  flat  piece  of  impertinence  which  deceived 
nobody.     My  failure  was  the  town  talk  before  night." 

IX.  What  qualities  are  requisite  to  the  construction 
and  de\  elopment  of  the  inference  and  remark  ? 

Why  are  these  two  things  classed  together?  and  in 
what  do  they  differ  ^  Rhetorically  they  do  not  differ, 
and  therefore  they  are  classified  as  one.  Logically  they 
differ,  and  therefore  they  are  not  synonyms.  Both 
are  rhetorical  sequences  from  the  body  of  the  sermon. 
An  inference  is  a  logical  sequence :  a  remark  is  a  sug- 
gested sequence.  Both  are  rhetorically  related  to  the 
discussion  as  consequent  to  antecedent.  The  follow- 
ing principles  shcild  regulate  them. 


624  THE  THEORY  OP  PBEACHING.      [lect.  xxxn 

1st,  They  should  be  legitimate  sequences  from  the 
body  of  the  sermon.  The  inference  should  be  what  it 
professes  to  be,  —  a  logical  sequence.  The  remaik 
should  be  all  that  it  professes  to  be,  —  a  natural  sug- 
gestion from  the  sermon.  It  is  no  objection  to  a 
remark,  that  it  is  not  a  logical  deduction  from  the  dis- 
cussion, and  it  should  not  be  introduced  as  an  infer- 
ence. So  of  an  inference,  it  is  not  sufficient  that  it 
be  suggested  naturally  by  the  discussion ;  and  we  faU 
shor^.  of  its  claims  if  we  introduce  it  as  a  remark  only. 
Call  each  by  its  right  name,  and  make  each  all  that  is 
claimed  for  it.  The  late  Rev.  Dr.  Skinner  of  New  York 
was  so  exact  in  his  nomenclature,  that  he  would  say  of 
a  series  of  applicatory  materials  at  the  end,  "I  shall 
now  close  this  discourse  with  a  notice  of  three  infer- 
ences and  one  remark."  The  announcement  was  need- 
lessly formal ;  but  the  distinction  was  essential. 

(1)  The  excitement  of  composition  easily  deceives  a 
preacher  respecting  the  logical  and  natural  relations  of 
his  theme.  Truths  may  be  associated  in  his  mind  by 
circuitous  lines  of  connection  not  obvious  to  hearers ; 
therefore  he  may  remark  that  in  a  conclusion  which  to 
a  hearer  may  seem  to  have  no  legitimate  connection 
with  the  subject.  Some  of  the  inferences  of  Dr.  Dwight 
have  been  criticised  as  illogical ;  whereas  they  might 
stand  as  remarks,  without  censure. 
^O  (2)  Sometimes  the  legitimate  connection  of  conclu- 
sion with  subject  lies  outside  of  the  range  of  the  discus- 
sion. The  connection  may  exist;  it  may  be  legitimate. 
The  inference  may  be  logical :  the  remark  may  be 
natural.  But  the  discussion  may  not  have  established 
the  connection  of  either.  Are  such  materials  legitimate 
in  a  conclusion  ?  No.  The  properties  of  a  hyperbola 
have  a  legitimate  connection  with  a  cone;  but  a  dis- 


usOT.  XXXVI.]     CONCLUSION :   INFERENCE,  REMAJRK.         626 

cussion  of  the  parabola  does  not  establish  that  counec- 
tion.  No  logical  mind,  therefore,  would  discuss  the 
properties  of  the  hyperbola  under  the  herxi  of  the  pa- 
rabola. So,  in  homiletic  conclusions,  the  ^xus  of  the 
inference  or  remark  with  the  subject  is  ng  i  legitimate 
to  the  hearer,  if  it  lies  outside  of  the  discussion.  The 
hearer  has  only  that  to  guide  him  to  logical  or  natural 
sequences.  He  can  see  only  straight  on.  What  the 
preacher  may  see  in  secret  connection  with  the  subject 
is  nothing  to  the  point.  The  actual  range  of  the  dis- 
cussion, not  the  possible  range  of  the  subject,  governs 
the  hearer's  range  of  thought.  He  has  a  right  always 
to  presume  that  a  remark  or  an  inference  is  a  result  of 
the  discussion.  If  that  presumption  is  often  falsified, 
confidence  in  a  preacher's  logical  faculty  is  impaired. 

Let  it  be  observed  here,  that  the  authority  of  the 
pulpit  with  hearers  depends  largely  on  the  reputation 
which  preachers  establish  for  the  integrif  *f  of  their  logi- 
cal power.  ^No  other  intellectual  quality  equals  this  of 
logical  reasoning  power  in  giving  to  a  clergyman  the 
authority  which  the  pulpit  needs  to  make  it  a  power  of 
control.  i<A  genius  in  illustrative  power  may  be  very 
popular  as  a  preacher ;  but  he  is  never  an  authority,  if 
his  logical  faculty  is  weak.  ) 

A  young  preacher  was,  not  long  ago,  very  flatter- 
ingly recommended  to  the  vacant  pulpit  of  a  large 
Presbyterian  church  in  a  Western  city.  The  chairman 
of  the  committee  of  supply  wrote  to  inquire  about  his 
character  when  a  member  of  this  seminary.  "  We  have 
heard,"  wrote  the  keen  judge  of  good  preaching,  "  that 

Mr.  B-^ constructs  his  sermons  by  first   collecting 

a  number  of  telling  illustrations,  and  then  builds  his 
sermon  around  them.  Is  this  true  ?  If  it  is,  he  is  not 
the  man  for  us."    The  man  in  question,  it  is  true,  was 


526  THE  THEORY  OF  PLEACHING.      [tKcrr.  xxxvi 

noted  for  his  illustrative  invention.  It  was  dispropor- 
tionately developed  as  related  to  his  reasoning  power. 
Some  sagacious  hearer  had  detected  the  disproportion, 
and  had  fastened  upon  him  the  label  of  the  criticism 
I  have  quoted.  It  may  require  years  to  enable  him  to 
outlive  it. 

Incidental  to  this  topic  of  the  legitimacy  of  con- 
clusions is  the  inquiry,  "May  an  inference  or  re- 
mark be  derived  from  only  a  part  of  the  discussion  ?  *' 
I  answer :  Yes,  if  the  inference  is  logical,  or  the  remark 
natural  to  a  part  of  the  discussion.  Sometimes  you  will 
discover  that  every  division  of  the  body  of  a  sermon 
suggests  something  peculiar  to  itself  in  the  way  of  prac- 
tical observation.  The  conclusion  branches  out  from 
them  like  the  spokes  from  the  hub  of  a  wheel,  all  fitted 
to  the  purpose,  but  no  two  fastened  to  the  hub  at  the 
same  point.  The  perfect  use  of  a  discussion  may 
depend  on  its  being  applied  thus  with  differences  of 
leverage. 

2d,  An  inference  or  remark  should  be  forcibly  de» 
duced  from  the  discussion  which  precedes  it. 

(1)  Legitimacy  of  deduction  is  not  the  equivalent  of 
force.  A  perfectly  logical  inference  may  be  fai-fetched : 
a  perfectly  natural  remark  may  be  feeble.  We  want 
the  practical  results  of  a  discussion  in  striking  lights. 
A  conclusion  should  be  a  specialty  of  the  subject.  It 
should,  therefore,  seize  upon  the  strong  points  of  the 
discussion,  and  only  those.  Inferences  and  remarks 
should  always  be  selected  materials,  never  a  conglom- 
eration. 

(2)  This  suggests  the  radical  defect  of  certain  con- 
clusions which  are  otherwise  faultless,  —  that  they  are 
not  characteristic  conclusions.  Lord  Brougham  said  of 
Junius,  that  his  delineations  of  character  were  severe, 


UECi'.  XXXVI.]    CONCLUSION:   INFERENCE,  REMAEK.         527 

yet  weak,  because  they  were  severe  abstractions.  They 
would  fit  one  bad  man  as  well  as  another.  They  hit 
nobody,  because  they  hit  everybody.  They  were  char* 
acter,  instead  of  characters.  Similar  is  the  defect  of 
certain  homiletic  applications.  In  their  logic  you  de- 
tect no  flaw.  Their  connections  with  the  subjects  in 
hand  you  can  not  pronounce  unnatural.  You  can  not 
say  that  in  themselves  they  are  unimportant.  Still, 
forcible  conclusions  they  are  not,  because  they  are 
not  characteristic  conclusions.  Did  a  group  of  Chinese 
or  Japanese  faces  never  impress  you  with  a  sense  of 
monotony?  They  all  looked  alike.  They  were  individ- 
ualities like  other  men ;  but  your  unpracticed  eye  could 
not  see  behind  the  one  mask  of  the  national  portrait. 
So  homiletic  applications  impress  a  hearer  who  discerns 
in  them  no  idiosyncrasies  created  by  connection  with 
the  subject  in  hand.  They  do  not  grasp  the  strong 
points  of  application,  and  only  those.  They  might  often 
be  interchanged,  —  the  peroration  of  one  discourse  for 
that  of  another,  —  and  the  effect  would  not  be  varied. 
It  might  be  legitimate  in  both,  yet  forcible  in  neither. 

An  example  of  this  defect,  which  is  met  with  not 
infrequently,  will  illustrate  it.  You  sometimes  hear  a 
preacher  remark  in  his  conclusion,  "  We  see  the  impor- 
tance of  meditation  on  this  subject ; "  and  on  this  infer- 
ence he  proceeds  to  enlarge.  This  inference,  or  its 
equivalent,  introduces  the  closing  appeal  in  scores  of 
sermons.  Yet  what  force  has  it  ?  Every  subject  which 
is  fit  for  discussion  in  the  pulpit  deserves  meditation. 
The  inference  might  be  appended  to  every  sermon; 
but  in  the  large  majority  of  cases  it  would  be  nerve- 
less, because  it  has  no  individuality.  One  preacher 
frequently  closed  a  sermon  with  the  remark,  "  We  see 
the  importanue  of  preaching  on  this  subject."     What 


528  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,      [lbot.  xxxvi 

force  can  such  a  remark  have  ?  None,  unless  the  sub- 
ject be  one  on  which  the  right  or  propriety  of  preach- 
ing is  doubted.  It  might  properly  close  a  sermon  on 
the  Seventh  Commandment ;  but  to  the  vast  majority 
of  conclusions  it  has  no  forcible  because  no  character- 
istic pertinence.  That  you  do  preach  on  a  subject 
assumes  the  importance  of  doing  so.  To  defend  your 
doing  it  implies  that  it  needs  defense. 

(3)  Care  in  selecting  forcible  materials  for  inferences 
and  remarks  is  the  more  necessary,  because  many  of 
the  most  essential  applications  of  truth  are  derivable 
from  a  variety  of  sources.  Conscience,  in  relation  to 
the  applications  of  the  gospel,  stands  in  a  center  of 
radiance,  like  a  man  in  an  apartment  where  light  is 
reflected  upon  him  from  a  thousand  mirrors.  The 
peril  of  preaching  seems,  therefore,  almost  inevitable 
in  the  direction  of  sameness  of  applicatory  remark. 

But  this  is  no  necessary  evil.  Every  truth  has  some- 
thing characteristic  in  its  suggestion  of  a  trite  applica- 
tion. It  gives  to  that  application  something  which 
other  truths  do  not.  Every  mirror  reflects  light  at  its 
own  angle.  No  two  in  the  thousand  are  precisely 
similar.  Neither  do  any  two  doctrines  enforce  a  duty 
in  precisely  the  same  manner,  with  the  same  motives, 
in  the  same  channel  of  deduction,  by  the  same  pro- 
portion of  forces,  in  the  same  perspective  of  moral 
sentiment,  as  seen  by  a  watching  conscience.  It  is 
not  necessary  that  a  description  of  a  bad  man  should 
be  true  of  all  bad  men.  The  worth  of  the  soul  does 
not  follow  from  its  immortality  precisely  as  it  follows 
from  the  Atonement.  The  love  of  God  does  not  fol- 
low from  the  law  of  the  seasons  precisely  as  it  follows 
from  the  gift  of  a  Saviour.  The  duty  of  repentance 
is  not  urged  by  the  doctrine  of  providence  as  potently 
as  it  is  urged  by  the  doctrine  of  the  cross. 


CKCS.  XXXVI.]    CONCLUSION :   INFERENCE,  REMARK.         629 

(4)  Here,  then,  lies  the  scope  of  art  in  constructing 
applications  by  inferences  and  remarks.  It  is  to  make 
those  applications  represent,  not  the  sameness,  but  the 
diversity,  of  truth.  Effective  preaching  is  very  largely 
the  art  of  putting  things.  It  is  not  invention  nor 
discovery  so  much  as  the  apt  placing  of  familiar  things. 
We  care  little  for  the  genus  of  any  thing.  We  crave 
species.  We  do  not  admire  the  genus  flora :  we  enjoy 
elms,  maples,  lindens,  oaks.  We  feel  no  sympathy 
with  the  genus  homo :  we  are  moved  by  men,  women, 
children.  So  of  the  applications  of  all  truth.  Let  them 
show  by  logical  inference  and  natural  remark  whatever 
is  peculiar  to  the  theme,  and  they  can  not  fail  to  form 
a  forcible  conclusion,  if  the  theme  has  any  force. 

(5)  Yet  it  deserves  notice  that  forcibleness  of  infer- 
ence and  remark  is  a  matter  of  degrees.  Some  themes 
have  a  more  distinctive  character  than  others.  The 
French  call  a  man  of  marked  person  and  demeanor 
distinguS :  some  homiletic  subjects  are  thus  distinguS, 
The  very  mention  of  them  excites  curiosity;  the  dis- 
cussion of  them  commands  interest ;  the  application  of 
them  fascinates  the  hearer.  Such  subjects  develop  into 
strongly-marked  conclusions. 

(6)  It  is  a  healthful  restriction  on  the  topics  of 
the  pulpit  to  rule  out  subjects  which  have  nothing  char- 
acteristic in  their  practical  uses.  Much  that  is  secu- 
lar, much  that  is  scholastic,  much  that  is  sentimental, 

"much  that  is  feeble  is"justly  excluded  from  the"subjecta 
of  sermons,  if  we  compel  ourselves  to  construct  them 
with  an  eye  mainly  to  the  force  of  conclusions.  Work 
always  for  results,  not  for  processes ;  for  ends,  not  for 
means.  So  shall  we  gain  the  most  vigorous  processes 
and  the  most  effective  means.  A  pulpit  thus  ruled 
becomes  the  mouthpiece  of  only  choice  thought. 


LECTURE  XXXVn. 

TRE  CONCLUSION :   INFBEENCB  AND  BEMABK,  APPEALS, 
EXCURSUS. 

Three  incidental  inquiries  occur  in  connection  with 
the  topic  of  the  forcibleness  of  inferences  and  remarks 
discussed  in  the  last  lecture. 

The  first  is,  Ought  an  inference  to  be  derived  from 
an  inference  ?  If  one  inference  has  been  drawn  from 
the  body  of  the  sermon,  may  a  second  be  added,  which 
is  only  an  inference  from  the  first  ?  The  answer  should 
depend  on  force  of  connection  with  the  body  of  the 
lermon.  It  is  no  objection  to  an  inference  that  it 
proceeds  from  a  previous  inference,  provided  that  it  be 
also  forcibly  suggested  by  the  discussion.  It  may  be 
related  to  the  primary  inference  by  logical  deduction, 
and  to  the  discussion  as  a  suggested  remark.  This 
complication  is  not  objectionable,  nor  is  it  as  compli- 
cated in  practice  as  in  statement. 

The  second  incidental  inquiry  is,  Ought  contrast  to 
be  tolerated  between  an  inference,  or  remark,  and  the 
body  of  the  sermon  ?  For  instance,  ought  an  inference 
which  appeals  to  fear  to  be  derived,  if  logical,  from  a 
discussion  which  in  the  main  appeals  to  hope  ?  Ought 
a  remark  addressed  to  the  impenitent  to  follow  a  dis- 
cussion addressed  to  Christians  ?  In  reply,  several  mem- 
oranda deserve  mention. 

630 


LBCT.  xxrvn.]    CONCLUSION  .    INFERENCE,  REMARK.        631 

In  the  first  place,  contrast  in  itself  considered  is  a 
natural  mode  of  suggestion  and  impression.  It  does  not 
necessarily  impair  unity  of  impression.  It  may  heighten 
the  impression  of  unity.  Contrasted  inferences,  there- 
fore, may  be  desirable  in  conclusions. 

Secondly,  contrast  in  an  application  sometimes  had 
the  advantage  of  creating  indirect  impression.  A  dis- 
cussion which  has  seemed  to  aim  at  the  impenitent  may, 
in  the  conclusion,  reach  Christians  by  reflected  applica- 
tion, and  vice  versa,  "  If  the  righteous  scarcely  be  saved, 
where  shall  the  ungodly  and  the  sinner  appear  ?  "  St. 
Peter  uses  in  this  text  the  unconscious  art  of  antithetic 
admonition.  Men  will  often  listen  by  stealth  to  indirect 
reproofs  which  they  would  resent,  if  given  directly. 
Like  Nicodemus,  they  will  seek  truth,  if  they  may  do 
so  under  cover.  They  will  preach  to  themselves  appli- 
cations which  they  would  repel  if  thrust  upon  them. 
Contrast,  therefore,  may  be  desirable  as  one  means  of 
indirect  impression. 

Thirdly,  contrast  is  not  desirable  where  the  material 
mtroduced  by  it  is  relatively  feeble.  With  all  its  advan- 
tages, contrast  involves  an  interruption  of  harmony. 
This  is  a  sacrifice.  The  object  gained,  therefore, 
should  be  obviously  worth  the  sacrifice.  The  material 
should  be  weighty.  Relatively  to  preceding  thought, 
it  should  mark  increase  of  intensity.  Otherwise  the 
chief  impression  made  will  be  only  that  of  a  jar  upon 
continuity. 

Fourthly,  contrast  is  not  desirable  at  the  close  of  a 
comparatively  feeble  sermon.  No  clock  always  strikes 
twelve.  We  all  preach  some  sermons  the  intellectual 
constitution  of  which  needs  tonics.  Discretion  must 
be  exercised  when  we  come  to  the  application  of  such 
sermons.     In  the  application  the  strength  of  a  sermon 


dS2  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING,     [lect.  xxxvn, 

is  put  to  the  test.  Contrast  in  its  nature  involves 
violence  of  change.  It  is  to  persuasive  discourse  what 
heroic  treatment  is  to  medical  art.  A  strong  discourse 
is  needed  to  bear  the  vigorous  working  of  it.  The 
sermon  should  have  been  composed  of  positive  thought, 
striking  truths,  vivid  representation,  lesulting  in  elec- 
tric impression.  A  phlegmatic,  nerveless,  negative,  or 
commonplace  sermon  —  and  we  all  preach  some  such 
sermons  —  is  like  a  frail  constitution  in  a  man  who  be- 
longs to  a  decaying  race.  Its  feebleness  may  be  over 
whelmed  by  the  vigorous  handling  which  contrasted 
^  _  /fnrp.ft  involves. 
/  1/  Finally,  contrast  is  not  natural  when  the  materials 
/ 1/  thus  introduced  can  not  be  speedily  dispatched.  By 
■  prolonged  amplification  the  force  of  contrast  defeats 
itself.  Contrasted  impressions  depend  on  transient  ex- 
pression. No  art  can  make  stationary  lightning  impres- 
sive. We  are  sensible  of  contrast  only  in  glimpses. 
A  contrasted  inference,  or  remark,  therefore,  should  be 
concisely  developed.  It  may  be  dense  with  thought 
but  it  should  be  rapidly  traversed. 

From  these  considerations  it  appears   that  contrast 
in  a  conclusion  may  be  the  best  material  possible,  but 
that  it  needs  to  be  selected  with  care,  and  developed 
f    with  force. 
'    /        The  third  incidenta'  inquiry  is,  Ought  inferences  or 
/     remarks  to  converge,  or  diverge,  in  their  relation  to  the 
I       discussion?     Obviously  two   methois  are    possible   in 
constructing  this   form   of  conclusion,  which   may  be 
distinguished   as   the   convergent   and    the    divergent 
methods.     In  the  one  case,  the  series  has  a  single  aim. 
It  bends  steadily  and  cumulatively  to  one  result.     In 
the  other,  the  series  is  versatile.     It  brandies  out  luxu- 
riantly.   In  the  one,  the  application  is  pointed,  like  a 


LBcrr.  XXXVII.]    CONCLUSION :    INFERENCE,  REMARK.        633 

thorn :  in  the  other,  it  expands  like  a  palm-leaf.  The 
question  is,  Does  force  of  application  require  its  restric- 
tion to  either  of  these  methods  ? 

I  answer,  In  the  first  place,  concentration  is  intrin- 
sically more  powerful  than  expansion.  Dr.  Lyman 
Beecher  used  to  claim  that  a  sermon  should  have  one, 
and  but  one,  "  burning-point."  This  is  generally  rather 
than  universally  true.  The  great  majority  of  evangeli- 
cal sermons  find  their  natural  resultant  in  some  one 
duty  to  be  done,  or  one  privilege  to  be  accepted,  or  one 
sin  to  be  abandoned,  or  one  truth  to  be  believed. 
Unity  is  so  intense  and  so  compact  in  all  earnest  dis- 
course, that  it  will  commonly  project  itself  in  the  appli- 
cation ;  so  that  an  obedient  hearer  goes  away  with  the 
resolve,  "  This  one  thing  I  do." 

But,  secondly,  the  divergent  method  may  exhibit  the 
fruitfulness  of  a  truth  in  practical  results.  Much  is 
gained  sometimes  by  disclosing  an  affluence  of  practi- 
cal bearings.  "By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them." 
Vine-dressers  recommend  one  grape  for  its  quality,  and 
another  for  its  abundant  fruitage.  A  certain  force  of 
application  consists  in  volume  rather  than  in  pungency. 
Conscience  surrounded  by  many  monitory  hints  may  be 
more  profoundly  moved  than  if  goaded  by  one. 

The  divergent  method  also  facilitates  variety  of  ap- 
plication. Respect  for  truth  is  awakened,  if  it  is  made 
to  appear  versatile  in  its  reach,  and  many-sided  in  its 
practical  uses.  Criticism  exalts  Shakespeare  as  the 
"myriad-minded  man."  As  we  respect  men  who  can 
do  many  things  well,  so  we  revere  a  truth  which  seems 
capacious  in  its  uses. 

The  divergent  method,  also,  may  make  one  applica- 
tion auxiliary  to  another.  An  appeal  to  one  class  of 
hearers,  suggested  by  one  inference,  is  assisted  by  a^ 


034  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,     [lect.  xxxvil 

appeal  to  another  class  flowing  from  another  mference. 

]\Ien  will  bear  to  be  reproved  by  one  application  of  a 

V  sermon,  if  they  see  that  others  are  reproved  by  another. 

'^'     Inferences  or  remarks  may  thus  work  as  allies  when 

they  do  not  converge  to  one  point. 

To  some  subjects  of  discourse  the  divergent  method 
is  a  necessity.  Some  themes  are  so  many-sided  that 
you  can  not  apply  them  thoroughly  in  any  one  line  of 
thought.  Condense  them  to  a  point,  like  the  flame  of 
a  blow-pipe,  and  you  leave  unused,  it  may  be,  their  best 
resources  of  practical  impression.  They  flash  light  at 
a  multitude  of  angles.  They  eject  heat  through  in- 
numerable orifices.  Therefore  they  suggest  appeal  in 
all  directions.  For  illustration,  take  such  a  theme  as 
the  justice  of  God.  One  powerful  application  you  can 
make  by  an  inference  from  it  addressed  to  the  fears  of 
men.  But  you  can  not  thus  use  exhaustively,  or  even 
affluently,  the  practical  resources  of  that  doctrine. 
You  can  not  thus  illustrate  its  most  amiable  uses.  You 
must  revolve  it,  show  how  prolific  it  is  in  practical 
uses,  reveal  its  attractive  as  well  as  its  repellent  vir- 
tues, unfold  its  minute  as  well  as  its  sublime  bearings, 
'"make  believers  love  it,  as  well  as  make  the  ungodly 
fear  it.  In  no  other  treatment  can  you  develop  to  the 
full  its  applicatory  usefulness. 
^  3d,  Passing  now  from  these   inquiries  incidental  to 

^  the  forcibleness  of  inferences  and  remarks,  I  observe  a 
third  suggestion  respecting  their  treatment,  in  the 
principle  that  they  should  be  developed  without  need- 
less  formality  of  statement. 

(1)  Formality  which  may  be  necessary  in  the  body 
of  the  discussion  should,  if  possible,  be  relaxed  in  tho 
application.  The  applicatory  process  must  be  flexible, 
its  transitions  easy,  its  forms,  therefore,  as  ductile  d^ 


^K 


LBCT.  xxxvn.]    CONCLUSION  :    INFERENCE,  REMARK.        535 

may  be  consistently  with  perspicuity.  Often  ease  of 
access  to  the  heart  of  a  hearer  may  depend  on  whether 
you  say,  "  I  infer  from  this  subject,  seventhly,  another 
application;  namely"  ...  or,  "Again:  this  subject 
teaches,"  etc.  So  slight  a  rhetorical  difference  as  the 
omission  of  the  personal  pronoun  and  the  numerical 
announcement  may  assist  the  passage  of  your  thought 
to  the  spot  where  you  wish  to  lodge  it,  in  the  sensibili- 
ties of  the  hearer,  rather  than  in  his  intellect  only. 

(2)  We  have  the  more  need  of  care  for  this  princi-7(^^ 
pie,  because  the  inference  and  remark  very  easily  fall 
into  and  under  the  formality  of  discussion.  Inference, 
especially,  is  a  logical  process.  It  readily  takes  on  the 
logical  baldness  of  statement.  This  is  illustrated  in 
the  excessive  multitude  of  inferences  to  which  allusion 
has  been  made  as  burdening  the  sermons  of  the  old 
English  preachers.  Flavel  has  a  sermon  with  twenty- 
four  inferences  in  the  conclusion ;  another,  with  fifty-six 
inferences  and  remarks.  President  Edwards  has  a  dis-  ^  M^ 
course  with  twenty-two  divisions  in  the  application;  \ 
another,  with  thirty-one.  / 

4th,  Inferences  and  remarks  should  be  developed,  if      ^ 
possible,  by  the  use  of  interesting  materials.  (    . 

(1)  Barrenness  of  treatment  is  nowhere  else  so 
great  an  evil  as  in  an  application.  Interest  elsewhere  11  / 
is  of  little  use,  if  not  sustained  here.  Interest  else- 
where should,  if  possible,  be  reduplicated  here.  Yet 
some  sermons  are  more  interesting  everywhere  else 
than  here.  Some  preachers  are  more  inventive,  more 
prolific,  more  racy,  in  every  other  process  of  sermon- 
izing than  in  that  of  applying  truth  to  its  practical 
uses.  They  explain  lucidly,  they  prove  forcibly,  they 
illustrate  vividly;  but  they  do  not  apply  truth  elo< 
quently.    In  their  applications  they  never  seem  fresh. 


th 

of       ) 
rt       / 


J^^utZ.  fMst^Um^  ^..AJ^u^  pdi^iv-^^y^-i-MW^ 


036  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING,     [lect.  xxxvn. 

They  give  the  fruit  of  jaded  minds.     The  oonclusioD 
falls  like  the  dull,  chill  pattering  of  a  November  jain. 

(2)  Therefore  we  should  never  trust  to  the  elabo- 
rateness of  a  discussion  alone  for  the  impression  of  a 
sermon.  That  is  like  trusting  to  the  trunk  of  an  apple- 
tree  for  its  fruitage.  We  should  never  trust  to  the 
truthfulness  of  an  inference  or  remark  for  its  applica- 
tory  force.  We  must  interest  men  in  the  uses  of  truth 
by  using  it  in  interesting  methods  of  detail.  No  art 
invention  should  be  despised  by  a  preacher  in  the  effort 
to  throw  a  spell  over  an  audience  by  the  raciness 
closing  thoughts  and  the  magnetism,  of  last  words. 

5th,  The  necessity  of  racy  materials  in  this  part  of 
a  sermon  suggests,  however,  that,  in  constructing  and 
developing  the  inference  and  remark,  we  should  avoid 
fantastic  materials.  That  is  an  ill-formed  or  ill-trained 
mind  which  revels  in  eccentric  applications.  Odd  laws 
of  suggestion  are  weak  in  practical  results.  Inferences 
are  vapid  if  extorted  rather  than  derived  from  a  sub- 
ject. Remarks  are  apt  to  be  irrelevant  if  foisted  into 
conclusions.  Such  conclusions  seem  scatter-brained. 
The  credit  of  a  sterling  truth  is  sacrificed  by  the  sub- 
stitution of  conceit  for  sense. 

In  nothing  is  the  weakness  of  eccentric  work  more 
obvious  than  in  the  practical  part  of  the  business  of 
the  pulpit.  It  may  interest,  it  may  stimulate,  it  may, 
therefore,  gain  a  hearing ;  but  it  seldom  develops  that 
sensible  and  solemn  aim  at  results  which  is  essential 
to  practical  force.  Above  all  other  intellectual  quali 
ties  in  practical  affairs,  men  prize  good  sense.  They 
crave  to  be  sensibly  appealed  to.  They  demand  to  be 
treated  like  men  of  sense  and  by  men  of  sense.  No 
other  opinions  are  so  weak  as  those  which  are  crotchets. 

Hence  it  is  that  genius  so  often  more  than  balances 


-"^JirvAvA 


LBCT.  xxxvn.]  CONCLUSION:   APPEALS  637 

its  good  work  by  the  evil  of  its  vagaries.  Good  sense, 
on  the  contrary,  has,  in  kind,  the  momentum  of  the 
planets.  Its  every  movement  is  power,  and  with  no 
drawback  from  waste  of  force.  Here  lies  the  strength 
of  the  great  bulk  of  the  Christian  ministry,  not  in 
cultivating  or  imitating  the  coruscations  of  genius,  dot 
in  stimulating  or  assuming  theatric  arts,  but  in  the 
planetary  working  of  common  sense.  This  is  a  power 
which,  as  Wordsworth  says,  "has  great  allies."  Time 
is  its  invincible  auxiliary.  All  social  forces  second  it 
with  the  certainty  and  the  reach  of  gravitation.  Noth- 
ing else  gives  such  power  of  command;  nothing  else 
wears  with  such  durability. 

It  deserves  to  be  recorded  that  fantastic  uses  of 
preaching  were  the  chief  cause  of  the  degradation  of 
the  English  pulpit  which  Macaulay  so  vividly  portrays 
in  his  narrative  of  the  state  of  the  rural  pulpits  of  Eng- 
land at  the  time  of  the  Restoration. 

X.  The  tenth  and  last  general  topic  relating  to 
conclusions  is  the  inquiry.  How  should  appeals  be 
conducted  ? 

1st,  Appeals  should  be  founded  on  the  strongest 
materials  which  the  sermon  contains. 

(1)  An  appeal  is  intrinsically  the  most  intense  form 
of  speech  to  a  hearer.  It  needs,  therefore,  to  be  sup- 
ported by  intense  materials  of  thought.  The  single 
burning-point  of  the  discourse,  if  it  has  one,  should  be 
the  point  from  which  exhortation  grows.  If  appeal  is 
made  from  more  than  one  point,  they  should  be  the 
strong  points  of  thought.  Never  build  an  appeal  on 
petty  items,  never  on  things  incidental  to  the  main 
channel  of  discussion,  never  on  an  anecdote,  unless  it 
is  illustrative  of  the  central  ideas  of  the  sermon. 

(2)  Discourse  should,  therefore,  be  so  shaped  as  to 


f 


538  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.     [LBC?r. 

bring  the  strongest  material  to  the  front  in  the  conclu- 
sion,  so  that  it  can  be  naturally  used  as  the  basis  of 
appeal.  Appeal  drawn  from  a  closing  division  is  natu- 
ral only  when  that  division  offers  a  climax  or  a  concen- 
tration of  the  truth  discussed. 

(3)  The  weakness  of  a  sermon  is  often  disclosed  by 
the  fact  that  at  the  end  no  other  than  pettifogging 
appeal  is  possible.  Imagine  a  sermon  on  "  The  Vest- 
ments of  the  Clergy,"  "  Genuflexions  in  Prayer," 
"  The  Marriage  of  a  Deceased  Wife's  Sister,"  "  A  Tem- 
porary Diaconate."  Would  not  the  intrinsic  feeble- 
ness of  such  sermons,  as  growing  out  of  the  insignifi- 
cance of  their  themes,  be  betrayed  if  an  attempt  were 
made  to  close  them  with  hortatory  applications  ?  Yet 
similar  to  these  in  principle  is  any  conclusion  in  which 
the  weighty  materials  of  the  sermon  are  overlooked, 
and  the  closing  appeal  is  grafted  upon  a  fragment  or 
an  anecdote.  In  one  instance,  an  exhortation  to 
promptness  in  attendance  on  divine  worship  followed 
a  sermon  on  divine  omnipresence.  In  another,  an 
appeal  on  the  duties  of  the  choir  followed  a  discourse 
on  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  Absolute 
irrelevance  to  all  parts  of  the  discussion  may  not  have 
been  the  defect  in  either  case ;  but  relevance  only  to 
incidental  or  fragmentary  materials  must  have  been  the 
defect  in  both. 

Appeal  expresses  the  soul  ©f  the  sermon,  the  very 
ipv^ij  of  oratorical  discourse,  as  no  other  feature  of  it 
can  in  equal  degree.  The  organic  Kfe  of  it  ought  to 
pulsate  there.  Therefore  the  most  powerful  of  re- 
sources should  there  be  put  to  use. 

2d,  i\ppeals  should  be  aimed  at  feelings  as  distinct 
from  convictions.  It  is  one  thing  that  a  hearer  should 
believe  that  he  ought  to  feel :  it  is  a  veiy  different  thing 


LMOT.  xxxyn.]  CONCLUSION :   APPEALS.  639 

that  he  does  feel.     Therefore  to  produce  the  conviction 
is  not  necessarily  to  produce  the  feeling. 

(1)  These  two  things  mark  the  chief  distinction 
between  two  classes  of  preachers.  One  will  make  an 
audience  believe  that  they  ought  to  be  moved,  that 
they  are  profoundly  guilty  for  not  being  moved,  that 
their  insensibility  is  the  extreme  of  depravity ;  yet  they 
are  not  moved  below  the  surface  of  the  conviction  of 
sin  in  being  what  they  are.  Another,  without  uttering 
a  word  upon  the  solemn  character  of  the  truth,  the 
obligation  to  feel  it,  the  sin  of  indifference  to  it,  will  so 
use  it,  and  so  appeal  on  the  strength  of  it,  as  to  take 
possession  of  the  hearer's  sensibilities,  either  by  storm 
or  by  insinuation,  so  that  tremulous  and  obedient  emo- 
tion shall  be  responding  to  the  truth  before  he  is 
aware  of  it. 

(2)  Appeals  to  convictions,  as  distinct  from  the 
feelings,  are  very  apt  to  express  themselves  largely  in 
an  exclamatory  style.  "  Oh  my  hearers,  how  solemn  is 
this  truth !  "  "  What  responsibilities  we  sustain  I " 
"How  deeply  we  ought  to  feel  in  view  of  them  I" 
"What  gratitude  should  swell  our  hearts  I"  "How 
fearful  is  the  guilt  of  deadness  under  the  sound  of  the 
gospel ! "  "Oh  that  divine  grace  may  melt  our  obdu- 
rate souls ! "  and  so  on.  I  do  not  say  that  appeal  should 
never  take  this  form.  It  may  rarely  be  the  legitimate 
©bject  of  a  sermon  to  show  to  hearers  that  they  have 
stolid  sensibilities.  Then  such  appeals,  so  far  as  they 
go,  are  pertinent.  They  are  forcible  just  to  the  extent 
of  the  thought  expressed  by  them,  no  further.  The 
emotive  drapery  of  style,  beyond  that,  goes  for  nothing. 

The  most  powerful  preacher  that  I  ever  heard  in 
appeals  to  the  emotive  nature  never  in  my  hearing 
resorted  to  the  exclamatory  drapery.    The  resources  of 


540  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,     [lict.  xxxvn 

his  appeals  were  his  facts,  his  principles,  his  doctrines, 
his  arguments,  his  cumulations  of  solid  thought.  These 
he  so  manipulated  that  they  made  their  own  appeal. 
Silent  emanations  from  them  were  going  forth  through 
the  whole  discussion,  which  softened  the  feelii  gs,  and 
won  the  affections,  and  gave  them  an  object  to  grasp, 
and  prepared  them  to  respond  with  reduplicated  voh.une 
to  the  few  unimpassioned  words  of  hortation  at  the 
close.  There  was  no  need  of  an  appeal  to  the  con- 
science.     That  outwork  was  carried  long  before. 

Such  conquest  of  the  sensibilities  by  the  force  of 
plain  truth  is  often  forestalled  and  forbidden  by  appeals 
of  which  the  point  is  not  feeling  itself,  but  the  obliga- 
tion to  feel.  Philosophically  regarded,  no  more  sure 
bar  to  right  feeling  can  be  created  than  the  assault 
upon  conscience  alone  and  in  isolation  from  other  fac- 
ulties. Introvert  a  man's  mind  upon  himself  in  the  act 
of  soliloquy,  —  "I  ought  to  feel,  I  ought  to  love,  to 
mourn,  to  hate,"  —  and  that  very  introspection  forbids 
all  feeling  except  the  sense  of  duty. 

(3)  Appeal  to  conscience  alone,  if  successful,  is  h} 
virtue  of  its  success  failure.  A  moral  nature,  indu- 
rated in  all  respects  except  that  of  a  quickened  con 
science,  if  the  proper  objects  of  right  feeling  are  present, 
is  depravity  consolidated.  Like  a  suspension-bridge, 
which  is  strongest  when  the  heaviest  weight  it  wUl  bear 
is  upon  it,  the  guilt  of  a  soul  is  most  hopelessly  consoli- 
dated under  the  burden  of  aroused  conscience,  if,  with 
the  objects  of  other  feeling  in  mind,  nothing  else  is 
aroused.  But,  if  the  legitimate  objects  of  holy  feeling 
are  not  present  in  thought,  the  torpid  mind  is  only  a 
philosophical  necessity. 

3d,  Appeals  should  be  aimed  ultimately  at  the  execu- 
tive faculty  of  the  soul. 


UECT.  xxxvn.]  CONCLUSION :    APPEALS.  541 

(1)  If  appeal  should  not  rest  with  conscience  alone, 
neither  should  it  rest  with  any  emotive  quickening. 
The  doing  of  something  is  the  end  which  we  strive  to 
reach  through  the  emotive  nature  as  the  natural  avenue 
of  approach.  To  arouse  emotion,  therefore,  and  step 
there,  is  as  unphilosophical  as  it  is  to  address  truth  to 
the  intellect  only,  and  pause  with  that.  If  the  doing 
of  something  is  not  always  expressed  in  a  naturally 
framed  appeal,  it  is  always  implied. 

(2)  In  this  consists  the  chief  difference  between 
hortation  in  the  pulpit  and  the  scenic  impression  of  the 
stage.  Theatric  passion  ends  with  itself.  Homiletic 
appeal  aims  at  an  execution  of  something  beyond  the 
emotive  excitement.  "  What  will  you  do  about  it  ?  "  is 
a  question  which  the  pulpit  always  asks,  the  stage 
never.  Appeals,  therefore,  should  always  be  con- 
structed with  fidelity  to  this  distinction.  They  should 
never  fall  into  the  theatrical  vein,  never  play  upon  the 
emotions  as  the  end  of  discourse,  never  rest  with  work- 
ing up  a  given  heat  of  feeling,  never  pause  with  success 
in  making  tears  flow. 

(3)  Hearers  need  sometimes  to  be  made  to  see  that 
their  religious  emotions  are  melodramatic.  Emotive 
luxury  sometimes  needs  to  be  checked  in  an  audience 
by  putting  the  question  plainly  to  each  one,  "What 
will  you  do  about  it  ?  "  The  sympathies  of  a  crowd  in 
the  street,  who  were  giving  vent  to  abundant  exclama- 
tions of  pity  for  a  blind  man  who  had  been  run  over, 
were  suddenly  brought  to  their  genuine  level  by  the 
inquiry  of  one  of  the  crowd,  "  How  much  do  you  pity 
him  in  your  pockets  ?  "  So  the  emotions  of  an  assem- 
bly of  worshipers  often  need  to  be  brought,  by  an 
appeal,  to  the  test  of  executive  action.  Did  you  ever 
observe  how  quickly  the  tears  of  an  audience  are  dried 


642  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,     [lect.  xxxvti. 

bj  the  passing  of  the  contribution-box  ?  The  executive 
test  of  feeling  is  sure  to  put  a  stop  to  its  effervescent 
indulgence.  The  deeper  reach  of  feeling  penet  ates 
below  the  level  of  words  and  tears  to  that  of  deeds. 

4th,  Appeals  should  be  kept  true  in  their  aim  to  the 
vital  acts  of  religious  duty.  It  has  been  remarked  that 
appeals  should  be  supported  by  the  strong  points  of 
religious  truth,  also  that  intrinsically  they  are  the 
most  intense  form  of  religious  discourse,  that  they  are 
the  acme  of  persuasive  speech.  In  keeping  with  this, 
the  dignity  of  appeals  should  be  sustained  in  the  acts 
at  which  they  are  aimed;  they  should  urge  the  vital 
duties  of  a  religious  life.  They  should  press  upon  hear- 
ers the  things  most  essential  to  salvation ;  they  should 
persuade  men  to  the  discharge  of  the  most  critical  obli- 
gations. To  expend  the  force  of  such  intense  forms  of 
speech  derived  from  most  weighty  resources  of  truth 
upon  insignificant  affairs  is  an  incongruity  and  a  waste. 
The  dignity  of  religious  hortation  is  degraded,  if  laid 
out  upon  things  not  vital  and  decisive. 

This  suggests  an  excursus  on  the  danger,  in  revivals 
of  religion,  of  exalting  unduly  acts  of  the  impenitent 
which  fall  short  of  the  scriptural  conditions  of  salva- 
tion. Much  is  often  said,  in  conducting  re\ivals,  of 
persuading  men  to  "  commit  themselves."  The  impeni- 
tent are  often  exhorted  to  pray,  to  read  the  Scriptures, 
to  ask  the  prayers  of  others,  to  observe  hours  of  reli- 
gious meditation,  to  attend  meetings  of  religious  in- 
quiry. These  duties  are  sometimes  urged  upon  children 
of  tender  age.  The  more  public  these  secondary  acts 
are,  the  more  positive  is  thought  to  be  the  "  committal " 
of  the  inquirer  to  something  which  stands  as  the  equiva- 
lent of  a  religious  life.  Hence,  if  he  can  be  induced  to 
let  his  voice  be  heard  in  a  Christian  assembly,  or  to  take 


tBCfr.  xxxvn.]         CONCLUSION :   EXCURSUS  643 

a  seat  assigned  to  religious  inquirers,  or  to  append  his 
name  to  a  religious  covenant,  he  is  regarded  as  being  in 
a  hopeful  state.  Under  the  pressure  of  sympathetic 
excitement  these  acts  of  self-committal  are  often  made 
to  appear,  especially  to  unthinking  youth,  as  the  vital 
duties  of  the  hour.  Is  this  a  wise  policy  in  'jonducting 
revivals  of  religion  ?  The  question  is  often  a  very  per- 
plexing one,  on  which  Christian  zeal  and  Christian  wis- 
dom aie  not  agreed.  In  answer  to  it  the  following 
things  deserve  consideration. 

(1)  To  defend  this  policy  is  much  more  grateful  to 
Christian  feeling  than  to  oppose  it.  In  itself  it  is 
plausible.  At  the  first  view  it  seems  harmless.  In  our 
own  day  it  is  often  the  policy  of  the  most  earnest  and 
spiritual  portion  of  a  church.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is 
often  opposed  by  the  ultra-conservative,  the  worldly, 
the  formal,  the  silent  membership,  by  those  who  are 
satisfied  with  other  successes  than  that  of  winning  souls 
to  Christ.  A  pastor  sometimes  finds  himself  between 
these  two  fires  in  respect  to  this  method  of  conducting 
a  revival  of  religion.  On  the  one  side  is  all,  or  nearly 
all,  the  Christian  enterprise  of  the  church,  and  on  the 
other  are  all,  or  nearly  all,  the  dead-weights  upon  Chris- 
tian progress.  Under  such  conditions  it  is  much  easier 
to  adopt  the  policy  in  question  than  it  is  to  create  a 
wiser  one,  if  there  be  such. 

(2)  But,  looking  at  the  question  in  its  intiinsio 
merits,  the  fact  is  a  very  significant  one  that  impenitent 
men  are  never  exhorted  in  the  Scriptures  to  any  thing 
preliminary  to  repentance.  But  one  thing  is  the  center 
of  all  biblical  appeal  to  the  ungodly ;  that  is  repentance 
and  faith,  —  a  complex  yet  a  single  act.  Nothing  short 
of  this  is  deemed  worthy  of  mention  by  inspired  preach' 
era  to  the  unconverted     "  Repent,  believe ; "  "  believe, 


L 


544  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING,     [lect.  xxx\ni 

repent ; "  "  turn  ye ; "  "  obey ; "  "  cease  to  do  evil ;  *' 
"  take  up  thy  cross  ;  "  "  follow  me :  "  in  varied  phrase, 
the  one  thing  is  the  only  thing  on  which  the  attention 
of  the  awakened  conscience  is  riveted  in  biblical  per- 
suasion of  the  impenitent.  Biblical  hortation  never 
even  directs  men  to  pray,  except  as  an  act  of  Christian 
faith.  Impenitent  prayer  is  never  named  in  the  Scrip- 
tures but  as  an  object  of  divine  abhorrence.  This  fact 
has  great  significance  as  a  representative  fact :  it  fairly 
and  indubitably  illustrates  apostolic  policy  in  the  con- 
duct of  revivals. 

(3)  In  the  nature  of  things  there  are  no  impenitent 
acts  auxiliary  to  repentance.  Nothing  commits  a  sin- 
ner to  a  religious  life  but  religious  living :  nothing  binds 
him  to  repentance  but  repenting.  One  and  but  one 
thing  is  the  thing  to  be  done ;  nothing  else  takes  the 
place  of  it;  nothing  else  assists  it;  nothing  else  ap- 
proaches it,  the  soul  remaining  impenitent.  Impeni- 
tent prayer  is  blasphemy.  As  the  subject  of  religious 
obligation  and  religious  motive,  an  impenitent  soul  is 
at  a  dead-lock  until  impenitence  ceases. 

(4)  Yet  human  nature  unregenerate  is  prone  to  acts 
of  religious  substitution  under  the  goading  of  an  angry 
conscience.  Condemned  in  this  thing,  condemned  in 
that  thing,  condemned  in  every  thing  but  in  the  one 
thing  which  alone  can  set  him  right  with  God,  an 
awakened  sinner  often  feels  it  to  be  an  immense  relief 
if  he  may  even  temporarily  persuade  himself  that  there 
is  any  thing  else  than  repentance  which  he  can  do,  which 
shall  have  in  it  the  semblance  of  good.  Reined  back 
»)y  retributive  conscience  from  every  thing  that  he  will 
do,  impelled  by  the  Holy  Spirit  towards  the  only  thing 
which  he  will  not  do,  and  crowded  on  all  sides  by  penal 
forebodings,  he  gains  time  for  consolidated  resolve  in 


UBCT.  iMvn.]         CONCLUSION :   EXCUBSUS.  645 

Bin,  if  he  may  but  be  penaitted  to  contemplate  as  a  duty 
any  thing  that  falls  short  of  that  one  thing,  which  for 
him,  in  the  moral  crisis  which  is  upon  him,  monopolizes 
all  duty.  (  The  whole  history  of  religious  formalism  is 
a  record  of  such  substitutions  under  the  pressure  of  an 
indignant  conscience.  Religious  formalism  may  be  as 
intense  and  as  self-delusive  in  taking  an  "  anxious-seat " 
as  in  attending  "  high  mass." 

(5)  It  is  remarkable  that  a  certain  class  of  revival- 
ists who  have  rebuked  this  abuse  in  an  ancient  form 
should  so  often  have  reproduced  it  in  modern  forms. 
The  time  was,  when  awakened  men  were  exhorted  by 
preachers  and  other  Christian  workers  to  pray,  and 
read  the  Bible,  and  seek  religious  counsel,  and  thus,  as 
>t  was  called  in  the  theologic  dialect  of  the  time,  "use 
the  means  of  regeneration."  Later  theologians  have 
detected  and  routed  that  form  of  substitutiag  for  re- 
pentance acts  which  are  not  repentance ;  but  by  exhor- 
tations to  take  the  "  anxiojis-seat,"  and_Jp  rise  for 
prayer,  and  to  attend  meetings  for  inquirers,  they  have 
often  created  another  class  of  precisely  the  same  sort 
of  substitutions,  by  which  men  have  been  allowed  to 
regard  as  duties  things  which  fall  equally  short  of  God's 
requirement. 

(6)  The  sympathetic  excitement  of  a  revival  may 
assist  the  self-confusion  of  an  impenitent  mind  as  to 
the  real  aim  of  God's  command.  Lord  Macaulay  says 
that  every  large  collection  of  human  beings,  however 
9fell  educated,  has  a  strong  tendency  to  become  a  mob. 
The  religious  excitement  of  multitudes  does  not  protect 
them  from  this  drift  of  human  nature.  If  solitude  in 
religious  awakening  has  its  perils,  so  has  companion- 
ship. Sympathy  in  itself  is  a  blind  instinct.  Numbers 
aroused  to  high  enthusiasm  tend  to  act  upon  unrea- 


646  THE  THEORY  OF  PBEACHtNG      [lect.  xxxvil 

soning  impulses.  Therefore,  under  such  impulses,  the 
commands  of  God  are  easily  displaced  and  obscured  in 
the  impenitent  mind.  Impenitent  youth  especially,  who 
have  no  religious  experience  and  little  self-knowledge 
to  protect  them,  are  easily  beguiled,  under  such  con- 
ditions, into  substitutions  of  the  less  for  the  greater  ia 
crises  of  their  history  in  which  the  greater  is  the  only 
thing,  and  the  less  is  nothing. 

(7)  Great  care  is  needed,  therefore,  in  revivals  of 
religion,  to  guard  men  against  deceptive  substitutions. 
These  subsidiary  acts,  in  whatever  sort  the  temper  of  the 
age  may  originate  them,  need  to  be  handled  cautiously. 
I  do  not  say  that  they  should  never  be  allowed;  in 
themselves  they  may  be  innocent ;  but  the  wise  policy 
is  to  make  little  of  them.  Do  not  emphasize  them  by 
crowding  men  to  them,  nor,  on  the  contrary,  emphasize 
them  by  violent  opposition  to  them.  Do  not  swing  a 
flail  to  crush  a  pepper-corn.  Treat  these  acts,  done  or 
not  done,  as  trivialities.  Exalt  above  them  that  which 
has  a  decisive  religious  meaning.  Keep  in  the  fore- 
ground of  popular  thought  the  one  elective  act  by 
which  the  soul  chooses  God.  Treat  every  thing  else  as 
relatively  of  no  momienl;. 


LECTURE  XXXVin. 

THE  CONCLUSION:    EXCURSUS,   APPEALS. 

We  have  considered,  in  part,  that  policy  of  the  pulpit 
which  often  urges  men  to  the  performance  of  acts  which 
are  not  decisive  of  religious  character. 

(8)  It  is  frequently  asked,  however,  "  .What  shall  we 
do  in  place  of  exhorting  awakened  men  to  such  acts 
of  apparent  self-committal  ?  "  A  period  often  comes  in 
the  experience  of  the  impenitent  inquirer,  in  which 
every  thing  seems  to  be  at  a  stand-still.  He  does 
nothing,  and  will  do  nothing,  to  the  purpose.  What, 
then,  shall  we  do  to  break  the  syncope  of  inactive 
guilt  ?  I  answer.  Do  just  that  which  the  Scriptures  do 
to  such  inquirers,  —  urge  anew  the  motives  to  repent- 
ance. Men  repent  in  obedience  to  motives.  They  act 
under  the  sway  of  moral  ideas.  Press  home,  then, 
those  ideas  which  are  the  natural  inducements  to  re- 
pentance. The  idea  of  God,  the  idea  of  immortality, 
the  idea  of  sin,  the  idea  of  penal  justice,  the  idea  of  the 
day  of  judgment,  the  idea  of  Christ,  the  idea  of  love, 
the  idea  of  dependence  on  the  Holy  Ghost,  —  these  are 
the  great  central  motive-powers  to  repentance.  They 
ought  to  be  the  staple  materials  of  thought  and  prayer 
in  a  time  of  revival.  Set  the  whole  firmament  ablaze 
with  the  glow  and  the  heat  of  'these  eternal  verities. 
Preach  them,  talk  them,  pray  about  them,  sing  them, 

M7 


->/ 


«  —.^   ^jt~tX^mJLtjL,^ 


./i- 


54g  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING-,  [lect    xxx\nn 

make  them  the  central  thoughts  of  public  and  private 
religious  services,  till  men  can  see  nothing  else,  and 
think  of  nothing  else,  and  till  they  are  convinced  that 
you  are  thinking  of  nothing  else.  Bring  the  force  of 
sympathy  thus  to  the  work  of  deepening  Christian 
thinking  upon  those  truths,  which,  in  the  nature  of 
things,  must  induce  repentance,  if  any  thing  does. 

(9)  Let  me  illustrate  this  policy  in  a  single  detail. 
Experience  in  revivals  will  teach  you  that  there  is  an 
inexhaustible  resource  of  suasion  to  repentance  in  the 
single  idea  of  God.  All  motive  to  holy  choice  centers 
in,  springs  from,  and  returns  to,  the  one  thought  of 
God.  The  human  soul  has  occult  afl&nities  for  that  one 
idea.  Neither  time  nor  sin  can  ever  stifle  them.  It  is 
surcharged  with  spiritual  cravings  which  find  rest  in 
no  other  conception  than  the  being  of  God.  Therefore 
it  is,  that,  in  revivals  of  religion,  that  preaching  is  most 
effective  which  superlatively  exalts  God.  All  preach- 
ing that  is  effective  owes  its  regenerative  power  ulti- 
mately to  that  one  truth. 

Surprise  has  often  been  expressed,  that,  in  the  reli- 
gious awakenings  of  the  last  century  in  New  England, 
the  doctrine  of  election  and  kindred  truths  were  so 
largely  treated  by  the  pulpit,  and  were  so  effective. 
Some  critics  account  for  the  phenomenon  by  the  hy- 
pothesis of  some  peculiarity  in  the  religious  tempeia- 
ment  of  the  times.  I  do  not  so  understand  it.  Those 
truths  exalted  the  sovereignty  of  God;  they  made  God 
seem  overwhelmingly  great;  they  realized  God  as  he 
is  to  the  souls  of  men ;  they  brought  God  near  to  the 
quaking  conscience.  Such  preaching  ought,  by  all  the 
laws  of  mind,  to  be  productive  of  revivals  in  any  age, 
whatever  be  the  religious  diathesis  of  the  age. ' 

Analyze  it  briefly  in  its  working.    Such  preaching 


LEcr.  xxxvra.]        CONOLUSION :   EXCUBSUS.  549 

brings  the  heedless  soul  into  contact  with  the  most 
electrifj^ing  spiritual  fact  within  its  knowledge.  It 
realizes  to  the  awakened  soul  the  most  stupendous 
conception  of  which  it  is  capable.  It  subjects  the  con- 
victed  soul  to  the  sway  of  the  most  intense  regenera- 
tive truth  o^  which  thought  is  possible.  It  lays  bare 
the  consciousness  of  sin  under  the  burning  eye  of  infi- 
nite and  eternal  justice.  It  is  to  a  guilty  conscience 
like  the  exposure  of  a  diseased  eyeball  to  the  glare  of  a 
tropical  sun  at  mid-day.  It  arraigns  an  obstinate  will 
face  to  face  with  the  only  thing  in  the  universe  which 
is  its  superior.  No  other  preaching  is  conceivable, 
which,  in  the  nature  of  things,  is  better  fitted  to  make 
the  condition  of  an  impenitent  soul  appear  to  itself  in- 
tolerable, and  to  break  down  the  defenses  of  its  will 
against  the  love  of  Christ.  Conceive  of  the  descent, 
headlong  and  far,  which  a  soul  must  make  in  coming 
down  from  the  empyrean  of  such  ideas  to  muddle  itself 
with  the  question  of  taking  an  "  anxious-seat "  I 

(10)  Again:  experience  in  revivals  will  teach  you  V/ 
that  often  there  is  a  point  in  the  development  of  the 
work  of  divine  grace  at  which  it  is  expedient  that 
human  jpersuasion  should  cease.  It  has  done  all  that 
it  can  do.  It  has  tried  every  thing  but  silence.  Wis- 
dom dictates  that  no  v^-  the  awakened  sinner  should  be 
left  alone,  and  for  this  reason,  — that  he  is  alone  with 
God. 

Always,  I  think,  before  conversion  takes  place,  if  it 
oecui-s  in  such  form  as  to  disclose  itself  to  the  con- 
sciousness of  the  sinner,  always  there  is  a  period,  long 
or  brief,  of  conscious  moral  solitude.  The  soul  feels 
itself  to  be  alone  in  the  universe  with  God.  The  isola- 
tion of  the  day  of  judgment  is  foreshadowed  in  its 
vision.     A  wanderer  in  infinite  spaces,  cut  adrift  from 


550  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING,  [lect.  xxxvm. 

the  solace  of  companionship  in  sin,  with  no  friendly 
hand  to  support  it,  or  voice  to  cheer  it,  the  soul  sees 
only  a  holy  and  offended  God,  whose  rights  it  has  out' 
raged,  and  from  whose  burning  eye  it  finds  no  hiding. 
It  is  best  that  this  should  be  so.  By  this  experience  a 
sinner's  individuality  is  intensified  to  his  own  conscious- 
71638.  To  break  in  upon  that  awful  seclusion,  to  bring 
a  sinner  back  from  "  God's  silence  "  into  the  circle  of 
human  sympathies  by  our  devices  of  "  anxious-seata," 
and  inquiry-meetings,  and  persuasions  to  self-committal 
in  the  sight  of  multitudes,  may  be  a  perilous  intrusion. 
Secret  intercessory  prayer  is  infinitely  more  safe.  By 
our  suasions  to  acts  which  fall  short  of  God's  require- 
ments at  that  critical  period  of  a  sinner's  experience, 
we  may  furnish  him  with  the  very  escape  which  he 
unconsciously  craves  from  that  sense  of  moral  loneliness 
in  the  presence  of  God. 

(11)  Silence  is,  therefore,  often  the  best  protection  a 
sinner  can  receive  from  his  spiritual  guide  against  the 
peril  of  the  social  element  in  a  revival.  Study  narrowly 
the  inner  working  of  a  revival,  and  you  will  find  that 
often,  at  a  certain  stage  in  its  development,  men  fear 
nothing  else  so  much  as  to  be  alone.  They  will  rush  in 
crowds  to  a  religious  meeting  for  the  sake  of  the  social 
S3'mpathy  with  which  it  surrounds  them.  As  men  in  an 
earthquake  will  huddle  together  for  the  sake  of  escape 
from  dying  alone,  so  awakened  men  in  a  revival  will 
often  crowd  an  inquiry-meeting.  They  will  seek  thus 
just  what  the  sons  of  Belial  in  the  community,  who  aie 
disturbed  in  conscience  by  the  revival,  seek  in  a  carousal. 
Any  thing  is  welcome,  if  it  drowns  God's  voice  in  the 
soul's  silence.  Therefore  I  say,  at  such  a  juncture  it 
is  safer  to  take  the  risk  of  silence.  Do  notliing  more , 
leave  the  sinner  to  himself;  drive  him,  if  need  be,  into 
Bolitude  with  God. 


iBCT.  xxxvm.]         CONCLUSION :   EXCURSUS.  651 

I  have  been  much  impressed,  in  reading  the  auto- 
biography of  Rev.  Dr.  Finney,  with  the  fact  that  some 
of  the  most  remarkable  conversions  which  he  recorda. 
occurred  instantly  when  he  took  himself  out  of  the 
way.  The  result  was  perfectly  philosophical.  When 
man's  voice  was  dumb,  nothing  was  left  to  the  inquiring 
soul  but  God's  silence,  and  to  that  it  must  succumb 
The  principle  here,  which  Dr.  Finney  seems  to  hav6 
come  upon  occasionally,  I  would  lift  into  rank  as  one 
of  the  elemental  principles  for  which  large  place  should 
be  given  in  every  revival  of  great  power  and  of  long 
continuance.  There  may  be  peril  in  it,  but  not  so  great 
peril  as  that  of  continuing  and  exalting  the  protection 
which  an  awakened  conscience  often  finds  in  sympa- 
thetic excitements. 

(12)  In  the  same  line  of  thought  I  remark  that  the 
popular  curiosity  about  numbers  in  a  revival  is  a  mis- 
iortune.  It  is  too  often  morbid.  Sometimes  it  is  a 
device  of  temptation.  Never  count  the  numbers  of 
those  who  rise  for  prayers.  Do  not  dignify  thus  that 
indeterminate  act.  The  good  sense  of  an  eminent 
evangelist  was  notably  evinced  on  one  occasion,  when 
he  was  asked  how  many  rose  for  prayer  last  night,  and 
he  replied,  "  Ijnever  count."  Do  not  be  solicitous  to 
know  how  many  attend  an  inquiry-meeting.  By  skill- 
ful manipulation  of  an  audience  you  can  secure  the 
attendance  of  hundreds  as  easily  as  that  of  dozens  at 
such  a  gathering.  Yet  as  evidence  of  conversions,  or 
the  piospect  of  them,  such  attendance  may  have  no 
tjignificance.  Use  an  inquiry-meeting  as  you  would  use 
a  Bible-class.  Make  it  the  means  of  religious  instruc- 
tion, not  a  test  of  religious  awakening,  still  less  a  means 
of  augmenting  religious  excitement.  Above  all,  never 
trumpet  these  things  as  tokens  of  the  presence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit. 


t)52  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING,  [leci.  xxxvm. 

(13)  We  degrade  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  if.  we 
exaggerate  a  sinner's  consciousness  in  our  assumption 
of  the  working  of  divine  grace  within  him.  If  we  use 
as  evidences  of  that  work  experiences  which  he  can 
attribute  to  no  such  origin,  we  may  do  him  an  irrepa- 
rable injury.  We  may  give  him  degrading  notions  of 
God's  work.  He  may  fancy  that  it  consists  in  suasion 
to  petty  and  indecisive  duties.  That  which  he  believes 
of  himself  he  is  likely  also  to  believe  of  others. 

Hence  arises  the  theory  that  a  revival  is  nothing 
different  from  other  sympathetic  ebullitions ;  that  you 
can  always  have  a  revival  if  you  desire  it,  and  can 
induce  sufficient  numbers  to  combine  in  the  persistent 
use  of  the  right  measures  to  evoke  it.  Certain  revival- 
ists make  a  most  damaging  concession  when  they  admit 
that  a  revival  of  religion  depends  on  the  magnetism  of 
numbers.  Once  sink  the  popular  theory  of  revivals  to 
a  level  with  that  of  other  social  ferments,  and  they  will 
be,  like  other  social  ferments,  shallow,  pretentious, 
short-lived.  The  grand  idea  of  "visitation  from  the 
living  God,"  having  mercy  on  whom  he  will  have 
mercy,  drops  out  of  them.  They  have  then  no  more 
religious  value  than  a  commercial  panic.  Few  things 
in  this  world  are  so  disastrous  to  the  cause  of  Christ  as 
a  perverted  and  degraded  revival  of  religion. 

Learn  a  lesson  from  St.  Paul.  Mark  the  unconscious 
satire  with  which  he  treats  even  a  duty  commanded  by 
God,  when  men  would  exalt  it  out  of  place.  When  ap- 
pealed to  by  certain  cliques  of  Christians  who  thought 
it  of  vital  importance  whose  hands  had  rested  on  them 
in  baptism,  and  were  crying,  "  Apollos  baptized  me, ' 
and  "  Cephas  baptized  me,"  and  "  Paul  baptized  me," 
he  responds,  "  I  know  not  whether  I  baptized,"  as  if 
he  would  say,  "  Baptism  —  what  is  that  ?    Who  cares 


LKCT.  xxxvra.]        CONCLUSION :   EXCURSUS.  663 

tor  it?  I  do  not  remember  any  thing  about  it.  I 
am  sent  to  preach  the  gospel."  So  nothing  is  worth 
remembering  which  men  would  lift  into  rank  with 
repentance,  but  which  is  not  repentance. 

So  far  as  my  observation  of  revivals  has  extended, 
impenitent  men,  and  especially  impenitent  youth,  need    | 
much   more   frequently   to   be   warned   against    these 
religious  substitutions  in  acts  of  "  self-committal "  than      ^ 
to  be   exhorted  to  the  performance  of  them.      Their 
value  is  immensely  overrated,  and   their  perils  over-    1 
looked,  in  modern  evangelistic  labor. 

(14)  Another  principle  bearing  upon  this  subject  is  t,^,_^ 
that  the  tendency  of  popular  religious  excitement  to  t 
morbid  growths  is  proportioned  to  the  insignificance  of    7y%^ 
the  executive  action  to  which  it  is  directed.     Neither/' 
nature   nor  grace   in  normal  action   fosters   profound 
agitations   of  conscience   about  petty   things.      Make 

such  things  the  center  of  intense  convictions  of  con- 
science, and  you  inevitably  create  religious  distortions. 
The  prick  of  a  needle  in  the  spinal  marrow  may  make 
a  child  a  hunchback  for  life.  So  let  an  awakened  con- 
science be  penetrated  deeply  concerning  action  which  is 
not  significant  of  character,  and  its  working  becomes 
diseased.     The  penetration  results  in  ulceration. 

(15)  Therefore  it  is  always  the  aim  of  a  wise  preach- 
er in  a  revival  to  guide  the  current,  and,  still  more 
carefully,  a  torrent  of  quickened  emotion,  as  soon  as 
possible  into  the  even  tenor  of  life's  ordinary  duties. 
The  speciality  "of  a  revival  of  religion  in  itself  is  not  a 
desirable  thing.  The  sooner  it  ceases  to  be  exceptional, 
and  flows  into  life's  common  channel  of  interests,  the 
better.  Religious  excitement  has  no  value  any  further 
than  it  can  be  thus  utilized  in  the  sanctifying  of  com- 
mon life.    All  conversions,  until  they  receive  the  test 


554  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING,  [lkct.  xxxvin. 

of  real  life,  are  of  the  nature  of  death-bed  repentance 
in  this  respect,  that  they  have  not  been  subjected  to 
the  divinely  appointed  discipline  of  religious  character. 
Hence  it  is  seldom,  if  ever,  wise  to  suspend  for  any 
long  time  the  common  routine  of  life,  because  of  the 
presence  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  regenerating  power. 
We  can  devise  no  better  means  of  moral  discipline. 
We  dislocate  the  divine  plan,  if  we  displace  that  in  the 
attempt  to  improve  upon  it. 

On  one  occasion,  in  a  powerful  revival  in  Amherst 
College,  the  more  zealous  Christian  students  sent  a 
petition  to  the  faculty,  that  for  one  week  the  collegi- 
ate curriculum  might  be  suspended,  that  the  whole  time 
and  interest  of  students  might  be  concentrated  upon 
the  concerns  of  eternity.  The  object  of  the  petition 
was  above  question.  The  methods  proposed  were 
plausible.  But  the  president,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Humphrey, 
had  had  large  experience  in  revivals.  He  told  the 
young  men  that  their  policy  was  unwise.  He  said,  in 
substance,  that  their  theory  assumed  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  was  pressed  for  time,  and  was  in  haste  to  go 
elsewhere.  The  routine  of  collegiate  duties  was  the 
very  test  which  God  had  then  and  there  ordained  of 
the  sincerity  of  those  religious  conversions.  If  stu- 
dents were  converted,  those  very  duties  were  tc  prove 
it,  and  to  discipline  their  piety.  Religion  was  to  make 
them  more  industrious  students,  better  scholars,  more 
faithful  to  college  laws.  The  monitor's  bills  would  test 
their  piety.  The  scale  of  scholarship  would  disclose 
it.  On  the  other  band,  he  told  them  that  the  surest 
way  to  divert  their  religious  interest  into  unhealthy 
moods,  which  would  soon  end  it,  was  to  relax  the  dis- 
cipline of  academic  duty,  and  leave  them  nothing  but 
prayer  and  praise  and  religious  conversation  to  think 


^/v^caJc 


I U3T.  Mxvin.]        CONCLUSION :   EXCURSUS.  655 

of  and  to  do.  He  told  them,  in  a  word,  that  they  could 
oDt  improve  upon  the  divine  method  of  procedure  in 
the  discipline  of  Christian  character.  The  petition 
was  kindly  refused ;  and  the  result  was  a  prolonged 
and  healthful  work  of  divine  grace,  quiet  and  deep  in 
its  progress,  —  quiet,  because  deep,  and  so  powerful, 
that,  at  the  close  of  the  year,  seven-eighths  of  the  stu- 
dents in  college  were  Christians. 

The  principle  involved  in  President  Humphrey's  rea- 
soning was  the  same  with  that  now  before  us.  As  reli- 
gious excitement  degenerates  if  isolated  from  common 
life,  so,  if  you  restrict  it  to  secondary  and  indecisive 
duties,  its  tendency  is  to  the  same  morbid  growths. 
The  more  petty  a  thing  is,  the  more  tumultuous  is 
popular  excitement  about  it  when  once  the  furor  is 
ignited.  Great  ideas  tend  to  deep  emotions:  these, 
again,  tend  to  tranquil  and  balanced  action.^  Petty 
ideas,  insignificant  objects  of  feeling,  indecisive  duties, 
tend  to  effervescent  emotion,  and  this  to  noise  and  clat- 
ter and  confusion.  )  Proverbially  the  great  workings  of 
God  are  still  workings,  and  this  because  they  are  deep 
workings.  Grace  follows  the  analogy  of  nature.  EY^^y- 
where  greatest  power  is  stillest  power. 

(16)  Therefore  the  phenomenon  is  often  witnessed 
in  revivals,  that,  the  more  complicated  the  human  ma- 
chinery is  which  is  set  in  motion,  the  more  uncontrolla- 
ble is  the  drift  to  morbid  paroxysms.  Such  machinery 
almost  always  precedes  pathological  disturbances  of  the 
physical  system.  Even  when  popular  excitement  does 
not  rise  to  hysteria,  you  will  often  perceive  that  the 
things  men  are  thinking  of,  and  talking  of,  and  exciting 
themselves  about,  relate  to^^e  igachinery  alone.  The 
anxious-seat,  the  inquiry-meeting,  the  rising  for  prayer, 
the  covenant,  the  public  speaking,  the  street  singing, 


566  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,  [lect.  xxxvm 

the  thousand  and  one  expedients  to  promote  the  in- 
terest of  novelty,  absorb  the  popular  thought.  You 
hear  almost  nothing  of  deepening  convictions  of  sin,  of 
new  discoveries  of  God,  of  new  disclosures  of  the  work 
of  Christ,  and  of  new  conceptions  of  the  work  of  God's 
Spirit.  Ask  for  these  evidences  of  regeneration,  and 
you  are  met  by  a  painful  silence,  or  a  gaping  ignorance 
of  your  meaning. 

(17)  The  conclusion  of  this  train  of  thought,  then, 
is  this,  that  the  true  policy  in  the  conduct  of  modern 
revivals  is  the  old  apostolic  policy.  Exalt  the  one  and 
only  act  which  God  requires  of  an  impenitent  sinner. 
Exhort  men  to  repent.  Exhort  them  to  be  reconciled 
to  Christ.  Show  them  that  they  are  enemies  to  Christ. 
Show  them  that  they  are  exposed  to  eternal  woe,  be- 
cause they  have  exposed  themselves  to  eternal  sin. 
Hold  up  Christ  as  the  only  and  sufficient  Saviour. 
Emphasize  the  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost  as  the  only 
spiritual  power  that  equals  their  spiritual  helplessness. 
Ply  thus  the  immeasurable  motives  to  repentance,  with- 
out which  no  man  ever  did  repent,  or  ever  can.  Never 
permit  the  awakened  conscience  to  elude  that  one  act. 
Keep  secondary  things  in  the  background.  Warn  men 
against  counterfeits  of  repentance.  The  Scriptures  are 
full  of  such  warnings.  Human  nature  in  every  age 
needs  them. 

I  have  termed  the  method  here  advocated  "  the  apos- 
tolic policy."  So  far  as  we  know,  it  was  the  policy 
of  the  Day  of  Pentecost.  There  is  nothing  in  it  which 
should  limit  it  to  apostolic  times;  nor  is  there  any 
thing  discernible  in  the  diathesis  of  modern  society 
which  should  require  the  abandonment  of  it  in  modern 
revivals.  Experience  indicates,  that,  just  so  far  as  it  is 
displaced,  revivals  become  a  mixture  of  good  and  evil, 


'Ty; 


LKCT.  xxxvni.1         CONCLUSION :   APPEALS.  557 

with  a  constant  tendency  of  the  evil  to  override  and 
overwhelm  the  good. 

5th,  A  fifth  principle  respecting  the  conduct  of  ap- 
peals is  that  they  should  be  specific  in  their  basis  and  ,;^  .q-JA 
their  aim.  The  point  from  which  they  spring  should 
be  well  defined :  the  point  at  which  they  strike  should 
be  equally  so.  They  should  never  course  at  random  in 
the  air.     The  following  facts  deserve  attention. 

(1)  Our  common  stock  of  religious  thought  contains 
much  which  may  stimulate,  yet  not  discipline,  religious 
emotion.  The  majority  of  men  in  Christian  lands  are 
trusting  to  a  certain  religiosity  of  temperament.  They 
prize  their  good  moods.  Their  dialect  in  speaking  of 
religious  subjects  indicates  that  they  have  no  strong 
points  of  religious  experience.  Indefinite  religious  ap- 
peal works  directly  into  the  service  of  this  capital  error. 
Start  the  flow  of  natural  religiosity  by  exhortation 
founded  on  nothing  specific,  and  aiming  at  nothing  in 
detail,  and  you  may  make  ungodly  men  think  very  well 
of  themselves  for  possessing  sensibility  enough  to  enjoy 
a  mood  of  good  feeling,  when  it  may  be  that  they  have 
experienced  nothing  but  a  response  of  their  nervous 
system  to  your  elocutionary  magnetism.  There  may  be 
as  much  rellgioa  in  their  sympathy  of  nerve  with  the 
electric  currents  of  an  Aurora  borealis. 

(2)  Sensibility  to  indefinite  religious  appeal  easily 
passes  also  into  the  imaginative  type  of  religious  char- 
acter. Not  being  reined  up  to  specific  duties  by  clear- 
cut  convictions  and  intelligent  emotions,  it  revels  in 
aesthetic  imaginings.  The  beauty  of  religion,  rather 
than  its  obligations,  the  poetry  of  the  gospel,  rather  than 
salvation  by  it,  the  literature  of  the  Bible,  rather  than 
its  authority,  the  sign  of  the  cross,  the  worship  of  the 
eucharist,  rather  than  the  life  of  spiritual  conflict  which 


( 


558  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHtNfi.  [lbct.  xxx^m. 

Christianity  reveals,  become  the  charm  of  religious  ser- 
vice. "  Thou  art  unto  them  as  a  very  lovely  song  of 
one  that  can  play  well  on  an  instrument." 

Nothing  more  surely  diverts  religious  thinking  into 
this  channel  of  imaginative  luxury  than  the  habit  of 
listening  to  indefinite  religious  hortations  from  the  pul- 
pit. Exhort  men  merely  to  "  be  good  and  do  good," 
and  end  there,  and  the  probability  is  almost  a  certainty 
that  they  will  wander  from  the  strong  points  in  Chris- 
tian faith  to  amuse  themselves  with  melodramatic  trifles. 
Feeling  which  might  be  consolidated  into  a  principle 
is  thus  kept  in  a  fluid  state  for  the  want  of  something 
concrete  to  consolidate  itself  upon. '  In  sheer  debility 
of  grasp  upon  any  thing  in  real  life,  it  muses  over  a 
wreath  of  evergreen  or  a  painted  window. 

(3)  Very  different  are  preaching  and  its  effects  as 
recorded  in  the  Scriptures.  Prophets  and  Apostles  and 
oui  Lord  start  with  definite  forms  of  religious  doctrine, 
and  aim  them  at  specific  points  of  religious  practice. 
When  men  wander  into  dreamland  in  their  notions  of 
religious  life,  they  are  brought  back  to  realities  by  such 
rebukes  as  these :  "  To  what  purpose  is  the  multitude 
of  your  sacrifices  ?  "  "  Bring  no  more  vain  oblations ;  " 
"  Your  feasts  my  soul  hateth ; "  "  Wash  you ;  make  you 
clean." 

Not  the  sinfulness  of  sin,  not  the  beauty  of  holiness, 
are  the  scriptural  topics  of  appeal  so  frequently  as  the 
guilt  of  covetousness,  of  pride,  of  lying,  of  unbelief,  of 
evil-speaking,  of  licentious  imagination,  and  the  duties 
of  almsgiving,  of  honest. weights,  of  self-sacrifice,  of 
prayer,  of  repentance,  of  faith.  The  strong  points  and 
sharp  points  of  Christian  truth  are  the  very  points 
which  inspired  preachers  use  most  eagerly.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  sensitive  points  of  human  practice,  the 


LE<rr  xxxvra.]        CONCLUSION:   APPEALS.  d59 

festering  ulcers  of  human  guilt,  those  which  a  deceived 
conscience  covers  most  carefully  from  rebuke,  are  the 
very  points  which  they  attack  most  mercilessly.  To  the 
most  saintly  devotees  of  the  age  they  say,  "  Ye  genera- 
tion of  vipers  I "  To  such,  they  apply  the  lancet  and  the 
scalpel. 

The  character  of  the  emblems  by  which  truth  and 
its  effects  are  symbolized  in  the  Scriptures  proclaims 
the  same  design.  Truth  is  a^sword ;  it  is  a  two-edged 
sword ;  it  pierces ;  it  divides  soul  from  spirit.  Things 
which  no  human  analysis  ever  separated,  it  analyzes, 
and  holds  up  to  the  eye  of  conscience.  They  to  whom 
Peter  preached  were  pricked :  they  were  pricked  in  the 
heart,  —  the  organ  which  a  needle  can  not  enter  without 
causing  death.  Saul  of  Tarsus  was  goaded  by  pricks. 
The  hoof  of  an  ox  could  not  resist  them.  An  ox-goad 
is  the  emblem  of  the  truth  which  prostrated  him  "  trem- 
bling  and  astonished*'' 


LECTURE  XXXIX. 

THE  CONCLUSION:  APPEALS. 

6th,  Continuing  the  discussion  of  appeals,  we  r©« 
mark,  in  the  sixth  place,  that  appeals  should  not  be 
unnaturally  passionate,  nor  weakly  pathetic.  Nothing 
cools  the  feelings  of  an  audience  more  effectually  than 
to  see  a  preacher  beside  himself  while  they  are  com- 
paratively tranquil.  It  is  said  of  the  appeals  of  Pat- 
rick Henry  that  they  were  never  vociferous.  They 
commonly  had  the  stillness  of  solitary  thinking.  Vast 
is  the  distance  between  violent  appeal  and  earnest 
appeal. 

(1)  Earnestness  in  exhortation  is  apt  to  be  in  in- 
verse proportion  to  violence  of  style  and  boisterousness 
of  elocution.  ^  The  palm  of  the  hand  is  more  expressive 
than  the  fist.  }  The  eye  may  be  more  authoritative  than 
either.  Some  of  the  appeals  of  President  Edwards  de- 
claimed by  a  theatrical  speaker  would  appear  ferocious : 
their  vehemence  would  neutralize  their  force.  But 
uttered  by  the  meek  pastor  at  Northampton,  and  the 
exiled  missionary  at  Stockbridge,  with  his  subdued 
tones,  without  a  lifted  hand  to  enforce  them,  with  looks 
of  only  benevolent  eagerness,  they  were  overwhelm- 
ingly earnest. 

(2)  Hortation  should  be  conducted  with  entire  self- 
P'jssession.     This  is  the  only  principle  by  which  thia 

060 


L 


^ 


LKOT.  xxxrr.]      THE  CONCLUSION :   APPEALS.  661 

form  of  conclusion  can  be  honestly  premeditated.  If 
a  preacher  loses  his  self-control,  it  should  be  because 
he  can  not  help  it.  He  may  literally  lose  it:  he  has 
no  business  to  hide  it,  or  to  pawn  it.  It  is  affectation  to 
cultivate  tears,  or  tremulous  tones,  or  inaudible  whis- 
pers, or  hiatus  in  the  voice,  or  a  style  of  thought  and 
expression  which  depends  on  and  invites  these  theatric 
expedients.  Never  shed  a  tear  in  the  pulpit  which 
can  be  suppressed.  It  is  a  misfortune  to  be  unable  to 
suppress  tears.  I  once  knew  a  preacher  whose  most 
remarkable  quality  was  the  readiness  with  which  he 
wept.  He  once  shed  tears  in  exhorting  Christians 
not  to  be  tardy  in  their  attendance  at  the  weekly 
neeting  of  the  church.  He  was  wonderfully  attrac- 
tive on  a  first  hearing;  but  he  had  ten  brief  settle- 
ments. 

(3)  Those  who  have  the  least  character  have  the 
most  abundant  flow  of  tears.  Tears  are  the  natural 
expression  of  infancy  and  paralysis.  A  sleepless  night 
may  make  a  man  weep  over  a  tooth-ache.  Chronic 
insomnia  may  evoke  tears  over  one's  morning  toilet. 
Infirmity  of  the  lachrymal  glands  is  not  numbered 
among  the  Christian  graces.  }  Cultivate  strength  of 
nerve  rather  than  delicacy  of  nerve.  Use  tonics,  study 
mathematics,  take  the  fresh  air,  take  to  the  saddle,-— 
any  thing  rather  than  chronic  tears.  We  must  appeal 
with  feeling  indeed;  but  it  should  be  the  feeling  of 
men,  not  that  of  schoolboys,  or  of  paralytics. 

(4)  In  the  long  run  men  are  not  moved  by  a  whin- 
ing pulpit.  A  rare  freshet  of  emotion  they  will  toler- 
ate: a  reputation  for  freshets  they  do  not  revere. 
With  the  majority  of  men,  life  is  too  serious  a  business 
to  allow  the  expenditure  of  sensibility  in  morbid  moods. 
Their  sober  second-thought   does    not   approve   such 


662  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,     [lbct.  xxrix 

moois  in  the  pulpit  more  than  out  of  it.  Why  should 
they  approve  them  in  a  preacher  more  than  in  other 
public  speakers  ?  Once  only  in  the  forensic  career  of 
Daniel  Webster,  in  his  plea  for  Dartmouth  College, 
is  it  reported  of  him  that  he  wept  in  the  court-room ; 
and  I  believe  it  is  the  present  opinion  of  the  bar  that 
law  was  then  against  him.  But  suppose  it  had  been 
his  habit  to  weep  before  juries  and  judges,  would  he 
have  been  Daniel  Webster  ?  If  a  preacher  habitually 
loses  self-control  in  his  appeals,  sensible  hearers  set  him 
aside  as  a  man  to  be  taken  care  of,  not  to  be  followed 
as  a  leader  in  the  thick  of  real  life. 

Possibly  it  may  appear  to  some  of  you  that  I  have 
spoken  with  needless  severity  of  the  loss  of  self-posses- 
sion in  the  pulpit ;  but  the  facts  of  clerical  experience 
justify  this  and  even  stronger  criticism.  I  find  in  the 
*'  London  Christian  World  "  of  Jan.  5,  1877,  an  adver- 
tisement which  reads  thus  :  "  Henry  Wiggan,  London, 
Evangelist,  better  known  as  'the  Weeping  Preacher.* 
Mr.  and  Mrs.  Wiggan,  Evangelists  of  London,  will 
hold  evangelistic  and  soul-saving  services  in  1877,  as 
follows."  Then  follows  a  list  of  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Wig- 
gan's  public  "  weepings"  for  the  whole  year.  Imagine 
a  man's  having  gained  the  soubriquet  of  "  the  Weeping 
Preacher,"  and  having  accepted  it  as  an  honorary  title, 
and  publicly  inviting  the  metropolis  of  the  British 
Empire  to  come  and  witness  the  paroxysms  of  his 
lachrymal  disease !  Can  the  dignity  of  religion  be  sub- 
jected to  a  more  humiliating  burlesque  than  this  ? 

Perhaps  the  lachrymose  sermons  of  Henry  Wiggan 
may  be  the  means  of  saving  some  souls.  Scarcely  any 
thing  in  human  experience  is  so  weak  or  so  wicked,  that 
the  Spirit  of  Grod  can  not  extort  some  good  out  of  it ; 
but  conceive  of  the  inunense   volume  of  disgust  at 


fcECT.  XXXIX.]      THE  CONCLUSION :    APPEALS.  56B 

religion  which  such  a  couple  as  these  wailing  Wiggans 
must  produce  among  sensible  people.  The  great  ma- 
jority of  mankind  are  men  of  sense.  The  '•'common 
sense  "  is  the  phrase  by  which  we  designate  the  work- 
ing of  the  grand  balance  of  the  human  mind.  Those 
who  will  be  nauseated  by  the  Wiggans  of  the  pulpit  are 
not  the  few  whose  fastidious  tastes  and  infidel  preju- 
dices make  them  natural  grumblers  and  chronic  cavil- 
ers.  They  are  the  great  majority  of  those  who  come 
within  hearing  of  the  blubbering  apostles,  or  withiij 
sight  of  their  advertisement.  The  silent  repulsion  from 
evangelical  religion  caused  b}  one  such  paralytic  in  the 
pulpit  is  a  fearful  offset  to  any  possible  good  he  may 
accomplish  in  the  conversion  of  a  few  souls. 

Lord  Macaulay  was  the  son  of  Zachary  Macaulay; 
and  Zachary  Macaulay  was  distinguished  as  a  Christian 
philanthropist,  and  was  the  son  of  an  estimable  Scotch 
clergyman.  It  has  astonished  the  readers  of  the  biog- 
raphy of  the  gifted  peer,  that  not  one  line  appears  in 
it  from  beginning  to  end  which  gives  evidence  that  he 
ever  had  a  thought  of  his  soul's  salvation.  To  religion 
as  a  personal  concern  there  is  no  evidence  that  he  devot- 
ed an  hour  of  his  brilliant  career.  How  is  it  possible 
that  the  child  of  such  an  ancestry  should  have  lived 
such  a  life,  and  died  without  a  word  in  acknowledgment 
that  he  had  ever  heard  of  Jesus  Christ  ?  Is  it  not  more 
than  probable,  that,  at  some  critical  and  sensitive  period 
of  his  youth  or  early  manhood,  he  was  repelled  from 
the  faith  of  his  fathers  by  some  such  mountebank  as 
this  "  Weeping  Wiggan  "  ?  A  fact  which  renders  thi? 
probable  is  that  Zachary  Macaulay  was  one  of  the  lead 
ers  of  the  "  Clapham  sect,"  —  a  small  and  erratic  clique 
of  Christians,  who,  like  all  fragmentary  sects,  had  pecul- 
iarities which  alienated  from  them  the  good  sense  u< 


db4  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING,     [leot.  xxxix 

the  great  body  of  English  churchmen  and  dissenters. 
Some  religious  weakness  of  the  Clapham  preachers 
probably  gave  to  Macaulay's  mind  an  anti-Christian 
lurch  from  which  he  never  recovered.  Destruction  of 
gifted  souls  in  silence  is  the  natural  fruit  of  Henry 
Wiggan's  method  of  saving  souls.  The  loss  of  Loid 
Macaulay  alone  to  the  Christian  faith  would  have  been 
a  great  price  to  pay  for  the  exploits  of  the  "  Weeping 
Preacher." 

(5)  Several  things  need  to  be  taken  into  account  in 
judging  of  the  degree  of  earnestness  with  which  an 
appeal  should  be  pressed.  Of  these,  one  is  the  intellec- 
tual culture  of  the  hearers.  The  tendency  of  cultivated 
mind  is  to  the  regulation,  often  to  the  suppression,  of 
feeling. 

Another  factor  in  the  account  is  the  strength  of  the 
material  which  constitutes  the  body  of  the  sermon. 
Vigorous  discussion  lays  the  train  for  a  powerful  ap- 
peal. Robert  Hall's  most  thrilling  extemporaneous 
appeals  closed  his  most  elaborate  sermons.  Hearers 
must  see  that  a  preacher's  hortation  stands  firm  on  the 
strength  of  the  truth  on  which  it  is  built.  Not  other- 
wise can  he  exhort  as  one  having  authority. 

The  earnestness  of  an  appeal  must  take  into  account, 
also,  the  mood  of  an  audience  at  the  close  of  the  dis- 
cussion. Abrupt  transition  from  discussion  to  horta- 
tion is  perilous.  To  appeal  with  great  animation  to  a 
jaded  audience  is  hazardous.  Shakespeare  represents 
Marc  Antony  as  burning  with  indignation  over  the 
dead  body  of  Csesar  at  the  very  outset  of  his  harangue  -. 
but  he  does  not  disclose  that  indignation  by  an  out- 
burst of  mordant  invective.  His  first  words  are,  "I 
come  to  bury  Caesar."  Calmly  and  sadly  he  accepts 
the  mood  of  his  auditors  in  place  of  his  own.  But  at 
the  close  of  his  address  he  has  wrought  them  to  fury. 


LBCT.  XXXIX.]      THE  CONCLUSION  •   APPEALS.  665 

7tli,  Appeals  should  be  so  constructed  as  to  imply 
the  expectation  of  success.  This  suggests  one  of  the 
subtle  pivots  on  which  the  success  of  an  exhortation 
often  turns.  The  general  principle  of  character,  that 
hopeful  men  are  successful  men,  applies  with  special 
pertuievce  to  the  effort  of  one  mind  to  win  the  obedient 
^sensibilities  of  another.  In  this,  more  surely  than  in 
Qiany  other  things,  men  who  expect  to  succeed  do  .suc- 
ceed. There  is  a  certain  fling  of  a  preacher's  whole 
being  into  an  appeal  to  excited  hearers  which  is  often 
irresistible.  Therefore,  men  should  never  be  exhorted 
from  the  pulpit  in  the  mood  of  despondency.  They 
should  not  be  appealed  to  as  if  they  were  too  far  gone 
in  depravity  to  be  hopeful  subjects  of  appeal.  Jere- 
miads are  suited  only  to  retributive  prophecy,  not  to 
Christian  hortation.  Preachers  of  melancholic  or  ultra- 
conservative  temperament  are  in  chronic  peril  of  failure 
in  this  respect.]  It  is  noticeable  in  biblical  appeals, 
that,  almost  without  exception,  they  are  expectant  in 
their  moods.  Even  denunciatory  expostulation  has  a 
ring  of  courage  and  expectation  in  it  which  prepossesses 
the  hearer's  mental  bias. 

Note  some  of  the  implications  involved  in  an  expec- 
tant hortation. 

(1)  An  expectant  appeal  implies  a  good  opinion  of 
the  hearer.  It  implies  the  belief  that  he  is  a  reasonable 
man,  open  to  persuasion.  The  most  depraved  of  meii 
have  been  saved  by  the  awakening  within  them  of  that 
single  conviction  that  honest  men  think  well  of  them. 

(2)  An  expectant  appeal  implies,  also,  a  preacher's 
confidence  in  his  own  cause.  Why  does  he  expect 
another  mind  to  believe,  another  conscience  to  feel, 
another  heart  to  obey?  Because  he  is  assured  that 
truth  deserves  it  all.     Every  hopeful  exhortation  is  an 


666  THE  THEORY  OF  PRKACHLNG.     [lbot.  xixix 

indirect  utterance  of  his  faith.     That  faith  allures  by 
sympathy  the  hearer's  faith. 

(3)  Again :  an  expectant  appeal  implies  personal  fel- 
low-feeling of  the  preacher  with  the  hearer.  In  a  suasive 
appeal  more  than  in  any  other  utterance  of  the  pulpit, 
we  come  near  to  men  with  this  power  of  fraternal  feel- 
ing. We  do  not  say  it;  but  it  may  be  all  the  more 
effectual  for  being  implied,  not  said.  "  Brother-man  " 
is  the  keynote  of  the  whole,  "  I  would  that  all  who 
hear  me  this  day  were  such  as  I  am,"  says  St.  Paul  to 
Agrippa.     That  is  the  spirit  of  an  expectant  appeal. 

(4)  Once  more :  an  expectant  appeal  implies  the 
preacher's  assurance  of  the  presence  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
All  hopeful  preaching  implies  that.  Hopeful  preaching 
honors  the  spirit  of  God :  God,  in  return,  honors  it. 

Such  are  the  implications  involved  in  hortations 
which  are  expectant  of  success.  Every  one  of  them  is 
a  source  and  a  development  of  power.  They  go  far 
towards  explaining  on  philosophical  grounds  the  suc- 
cesses of  certain  preachers  whose  exhortations  are  mar- 
velous in  their  results. 

8th,  Appeals,  above  all  other  utterances  of  the  pul 
pit,  demand  a  natural  elocution.  The  close  contact 
implied  in  direct  hortation  needs  to  avoid  all  possibly 
repellent  adjuncts  of  speech.  Nowhere  else,  therefore, 
is  unnatural  delivery  so  hurtful.  We  need  but  to  name 
the  chief  defects  of  pulpit  elocution  to  be  made  sensi- 
ble of  the  truth  of  this.  Inanimate  appeals,  sing-song 
in  appeals,  theatrical  appeals,  declamatory  appeals,  ex- 
cessive passion  in  appeals,  unmeaning  or  unfit  or  in- 
ordinate gesture  in  appeals,  whining  appeals,  hysteric 
appeals,  appeals  through  the  nose,  guttural  appeals,  the 
peculiarity  of  an  untrained  voice  which  resembles  the 
quacking  of  a  duck  in  appeals,  screaming  and  bellow- 


LKCT.  XXXIX.]      THE  CONCLUSION :   APPBALS.  667 

ing,  with  alternate  whispering,  in  appeals,  rolling  of  the 
eyeballs  in  appeals,  the  scowl,  the  grin,  the  froth  of  sali- 
va in  appeals  —  is  there  any  other  feature  or  process 
of  oral  speech  in  which  these  faults  of  delivery  are  €o 
repulsive  as  in  this,  in  which  we  aim  to  speak  to  the 
inmost  being  of  a  hearer,  and  to  get  possession  of  his 
heart  ?  That  which  we  tolerate  elsewhere  is  unendura- 
ble here.  That  which  is  only  unpleasant  elsewhere  is 
disgusting  here.  That  which  we  smile  at  elsewhere 
nauseates  us  here. 

Elocution  has  indefinable  graces  and  blemishes  which 
are  like  perfumes  and  unpleasant  odors  in  the  atmos- 
phere. We  may  not  observe  them,  if  our  attention  is 
not  called  to  them ;  but,  in  the  close  intimacy  between 
hearer  and  speaker  which  an  appeal  assumes  as  its  pre- 
rogative, they  are  forced  upon  our  attention.  The  curve 
of  a  lip,  or  the  movement  of  an  eyelid,  may,  in  such  a 
connection,  be  the  decisive  thing  which  wins  a  soul,  or 
disgusts  a  soul. 

9th,  The  foregoing  remarks  suggest  that  appeals 
should  be  prepared  and  spoken  under  the  sway  of  gen- 
jiine  feeling  on  the  part  of  the  preacher.  Most  of  the 
defects  in  exhortations  which  we  have  noticed  arise 
from  one  form  or  another  of  fictitious  emotion.  Genu- 
ine emotion  is,  to  a  large  extent,  a  law  unto  itself. 

(1)  An  artistic  appeal  is  always  frigid.  It  may  be 
bold,  pungent,  mordant ;  or  it  may  be  beautiful,  pathet- 
ic, melting.  We  may  marvel  that  it  is  not  impressive, 
yet  it  is  not  impressive.  It  is  the  voice  of  one  who 
describes,  not  of  one  who  feels. 

(2)  Preachers  experience  a  temptation  and  a  peril  in 
this  respect,  growing  out  of  long  practice  in  homiletic 
exhortation,  which  renders  it  easy  and  fluent  in  execu- 
tion.    Frederic  Robertson  somewhere  speaks  of  "the 


668  THE  THEORY  OF  PBBaCHINQ.     [lww.  xxzix. 

fatal  facility  of  religious  discourse"  produced  by  the 
professional  habits  of  preachers.  Words  of  earnest  ap- 
peal may  flow  glibly,  yet  the  preacher  may  feel  only  the 
glow  of  professional  excitement.  When  such  perfunc 
t^ry  appeals  become  the  habit  of  the  pulpit,  the  vio- 
lence they  inflict  on  the  moral  nature  of  the  preacher 
is  appalling.  It  is  a  truism  —  yet  its  profoundness 
obscures  our  vision  of  it  —  that  religious  hortation 
should  find  in  the  preacher's  own  soul  its  most  docile 
hearer.  He  should  take  to  himself  the  admonitions 
which  he  so  feelingly  addresses  to  others.  In  no  other 
way  can  he  be  honest  in  their  utterance.  In  no  other 
way  can  preaching  secure  the  advantage  so  obviously 
aimed  at  by  the  divine  arrangement  by  which  human 
nature  is  made  to  appeal  to  human  nature. 

(3)  Why  are  the  chosen  oracles  of  the  gospel  men  ? 
So  far  as  we  know,  superlative  orders  of  being  might 
have  been  superlative  preachers  of  the  gospel ;  yet  the 
advantages  of  an  angelic  and  sinless  apostleship  God 
has  seen  fit  to  forego  for  the  sake  of  that  which  we  must 
therefore  believe  to  be  the  superior  force  of  a  human 
ministry.  A  human  intellect,  human  sensibilities,  a 
human  voice  are  chosen  before  the  trump  of  archan- 
gels. The  principle  of  sympathy  is  clearly  exalted 
above  the  principle  of  authority.  Even  an  experience 
of  sin  is  put  to  higher  uses  than  might  have  attended 
a  history  of  spotless  purity.  But  the  wisdom  of  this 
whole  system  of  instrumentalities  for  saving  men  by 
the  persuasions  of  men  is  nullified,  if  the  preacher  doea 
not  take  the  place  to  which  his  mission  assigns  him  as 
a  fellow-man  and  a  fellow-sinner  who  needs,  first  of  all, 
the  appeals  which  he  aims  at  other  men.  Says  Presi 
dent  Davies  of  Virginia  in  one  of  the  soliloquies  with 
which  he  sometimes  closed  Iris  most  thrilling  sermons, 


(: 


Lmcn.  XXXIX.]      THE  CONCLUSION :   APPEALS.  669 


"  Oh  my  soul,  hear  thou  this  word  jl  for  I  must  preach 
to  the  one  who  needs  it  most."       Jf 

(4)  An  artistic  appeal  will  conlmonly  betray  itself  to  \ 
a  practiced  hearer  by  something  characteristic  of  imagi- 
native fervor.  A  bookish  vocabulary,  traces  of  archaic 
diction,  involution  of  sentences,  elaborated  metaphor, 
rhythmical  construction,  scholastic  illustration,  —  one  or 
more  of  such  signs  will  appear,  showing  that  the  head 
has  labored  more  than  the  heart  in  the  framing  of  the 
appeal.  Hearers  may  think  it  very  fine  in  its  way ;  but 
they  will  feel  that  it  is  not  the  way  in  which  hearts  talk 
to  hearts.  "  I  thought  your  sentences  were  very  pret- 
ty," was  the  commendation  by  which  one  plain  hearer 
thought  to  please  a  youthful  preacher  who  had  just  fin- 
ished a  sermon  on  the  Day  of  Judgment. 

(5)  Sometimes  the  artistic  counterfeit  will  betray 
itself  by  rudeness  of  hortation.  Appeals  to  the  feelings, 
if  genuine,  will  always  be  studious  of  proprieties.  They 
are  not  regardless  of  age,  of  sex,  of  time,  of  circimi- 
stance.  They  will  not  descend  to  low  illustration  or 
rough  description.  When  Latimer,  for  example,  in  an 
appeal  to  certain  afflicted  hearers,  said,  "  In  this  visita- 
tion God  shaketh  us  by  the  noses,  and  puUeth  us  by  the 
ears,"  he  was  working  up  his  peroration  artistically.  He 
was  not  speaking  from  a  full  heart,  in  sympathy  with 
bereaved  men  and  women.  Art  can  not  manufacture  a 
genuine  appeal.  As  easily  might  the  science  \^'hi:3h 
analyzes  an  eyeball  create  an  eyeball.  No  audience 
will  habitually  mistake  the  fictitious  for  the  genuine 
hortation.  Preachers,  like  other  men,  and  in  this  as  in 
other  things,  are  always  found  out  in  the  end,  and  pas? 
for  what  they  are. 

(6)  An  appeal,  therefore,  which  is  genuine  in  the 
composing,  shoul/l  not  be  preached,  if  it  is  not  genuine 


/ 


\ 


670  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHINQ.     [lsot.  xxxix. 

in  the  delivery.  A  written  appeal  should  be  reviewed 
and  revolved  near  the  time  of  its  delivery,  so  that  the 
mind  shall  resuscitate  the  mood  of  its  composing.  If 
this  fails,  let  the  appeal  be  dropped.  You  have  lost  it, 
if  you  have  lost  heart  in  it.  Do  not  expose  the  corpse 
of  it.  Preach  whatever  is  alive  to  the  mood  of  the 
hour. 

(7)  To  accomplish  this  without  sacrifice  of  premedi- 
tated appeals,  the  habit  of  spiritual  preparation  for  the 
delivery  of  a  sermon  is  indispensable.  Those  who  have 
been  most  successful  in  achieving  the  great  ends  of 
preaching  have  been  most  faithful  to  this  discipline  of 
secret  prayer.  Baxter  used  to  pray  thus  with  his  Bible 
open  before  him,  and  his  finger  on  the  text  of  his  ser- 
mon. Often,  with  tears  of  impassioned  desire,  would 
he  pour  forth  his  supplications  for  the  spiritual  success 
of  his  day's  work.  On  one  occasion  when  the  thought 
occurred  to  him,  when  thus  prostrate  before  God,  of 
his  popularity  as  a  preacher,  and  of  the  throngs  which 
he  knew  would  crowd  the  church  where  he  was  about 
to  preach,  he  broke  out  with  the  exclamation,  "  Not 
this,  not  this,  O  Lord  I  but  the  souls  of  this  poor  people 
of  Kidderminster ! " 

St.  Paul  illustrates  in  his  own  person  the  genuine 
mood  of  homiletic  exhortation,  when  he  says,  "As 
though  God  did  beseech  you  by  us,  we  pray  you  in 
Christ's  stead."  That  consciousness  of  being  the  rep- 
resentative of  God  to  men,  delivering  the  message 
which  God  dictates,  uttering  God's  thought  in  God's 
words,  expressing  God's  heart  in  intense  desire  to  sav» 
men,  is  the  true  mood  of  Christian  appeal.  To  obtain 
it,  a  preacher  must  often  go  aside  into  the  thick  dark- 
ness where  God  is,  and  where  God  shall  speak  to  him 
is  to  a  friend. 


LBOT.  xixix.]      THE  CONCLUSION :   APPEALS.  571 

10th,  Appeals  should  not  be  developed  at  great 
length.  With  men,  as  with  God,  we  are  not  heard  foi 
our  much  speaking.  Cicero  says  that  nothing  dries  up 
sooner  than  tears.  Sensibility,  from  its  very  nature, 
does  not  bear  long-winded  appeal.  How  shall  the  peril 
be  avoided?  I  answer.  By  oblique  progress.  Inter- 
sperse appeal  with  didactic  remark.  Suspend  appeal, 
and  speak  didactically;  then  renew  the  appeal,  and 
again  suspend  it.  Tack,  as  in  oblique  sailing.  A  dis- 
course may  thus  preserve  its  predominant  character  of 
hortation  without  the  weariness  of  unremitting  horta- 
tion. 

11th,  Appeals  should  possess  unbounded  versatility. 
One  writer  on  homiletics  prescribes  the  rule  that  ser- 
mons ought  not  all  to  end  with  the  words  "  life  ever- 
lasting." 

(1)  Appeals  should  be  varied  in  respect  to  the  class 
of  sensibilities  to  which  appeal  is  made.  Sensibilities 
inferior  to  the  sense  of  right  are  its  natural  auxiliaries, 
and  should  often  be  summoned  to  its  support.  The 
sense  of  order,  the  sense  of  beauty,  the  sense  of  honor, 
the  patriotic  instinct,  the  social  affections,  the  love  of 
knowledge,  self-respect  are  natural  allies  of  conscience. 
They  are,  therefore,  proper  objects  of  appeal  in  preach- 
ing. 

(2)  Hortations  should  be  varied,  also,  in  respect  to 
the  truths  on  which  they  are  founded.  Preachers  who 
have  a  large  range  of  discussion  often  narrow  that 
range  unconsciously  in  their  conclusions.  They  adopt 
favorite  ideas,  which,  with  little  variation,  are  wrought 
into  all  their  exhortations.  The  favorite  of  one  is 
death;  of  another,  the  day  of  judgment;  of  a  third, 
heaven ;  of  a  fourth,  the  proportion  of  responsibility  ta 
piivilege ;  of  a  fifth,  the  degeneracy  of  modern  times. 


572  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING,     [leot.  xxxix. 

The  sam(3  class  of  feelings  ought  not  always  to  be 
excited  by  the  same  class  of  truths.  Appeals  to  fear 
may  often  be  more  effective  if  founded  on  the  peril  of 
eternal  sin  than  if  founded  on  the  peril  of  eternal  suf- 
fering. The  chief  advantage  of  novelty  in  preaching 
is  that  it  touches  the  sensibilities  of  hearers  in  a  way  in 
which  they  were  never  moved  before. 

(3)  Appeals  should  be  varied,  also,  in  their  rhetorical 
structure.  Vary  them  in  respect  to  their  degree  of 
directness.  Vary  them  as  to  the  use  of  the  personal 
pronouns.  A  delicate  but  often  very  valuable  differ- 
ence in  structure  depends  on  whether  a  preacher  saya 
"  we,"  or  "  you,"  in  an  exhortation. 

Vary  appeals,  also,  in  the  methods  of  designating  tha 
character  of  hearers.  There  is  more  than  a  rhetorical 
difference  between  "  sinner  "  and  "  fellow-sinner,"  be- 
tween "  impenitent  hearer,"  and  "  impenitent  friend,' 
between  "Christians"  and  "Christian  friends."  By 
circumlocution  the  rhetorical  form  may  be  diversified 
indefinitely.  William  Jay  used  to  employ  such  forms 
as  these ;  "  You  singers  to  God's  praise,"  "  you  wor- 
shipers in  God's  house,"  "  you  hearers  of  God's  truth." 
He  was  not  always  studious  of  connections  in  his  forms 
of  address.  On  one  occasion  he  said,  "Some  of  you 
are  so  inconsistent  in  your  lives,  that,  if  I  should  see  the 
devil  running  off  with  you  at  this  moment,  I  could  net 
cry,  '  Stop  thief ! '  He  would  but  carry  off  his  own 
property."  Yet  this  invective  he  introduced  by  the 
address,  "  My  dear  brethren." 

(4)  In  seeking  variety  of  rhetorical  form,  care  should 
be  taken  to  avoid  some  terms  which  the  pulpit  has 
employed  improperly.  Dr.  Payson  used  to  address 
Christians  as  " professors."  Professors  of  what?  The 
itlfi  is  a  technicality.     "My  professing  friends"  waa 


L»CT.  XXXIX.]      THE  CONCLUSION :   APPEALS.  673 

also  a  favorite  with  Dr.  Payson.  It  is  ambiguous. 
President  Davies  often  addressed  his  hearers  by  the 
title  "  Sirs."  In  Virginia  this  was  a  title  of  social  dis* 
tinction ;  but  it  expresses  no  distinction  with  which  the 
gospel  is  concerned. 

(5)  In  seeking  variety  of  address  in  the  forms  of 
appeal,  we  should  be  sparing  in  the  use  of  affectionate 
titles.  "  Dear  hearers,"  "  dear  friends,"  "  dear  brethren," 
"dear  sisters,"  "beloved  in  the  Lord,"  and  the  like,  can 
not  become  habitual  in  appeals  without  impairing  their 
force.  This  may  occur  in  two  ways.  Often  used,  these 
forms  degenerate  into  forms  only.  To  many  hearers 
they  mean  nothing.  They  are  like  the  affectionate  ad- 
dress and  the  servile  subscription  of  the  beginning  and 
ending  of  letters.  Any  thing  has  become  an  encum- 
brance which  has  become  only  a  form.  Every  thing 
else  should  be  sacrificed  rather  than  an  impression  of 
sincerity.  In  iiortation  we  should  say  nothing  which 
we  do  not  mean.  Moreover,  affectionate  titles,  if 
habitual,  and  yet  so  employed  as  to  escape  the  danger 
of  formality,  will  often  appear  unmanly.  To  an  audi- 
ence of  children  they  might  not  do  so ;  but  full-grown 
men  are  chary  of  such  titles  in  the  realities  of  life,  and 
suspicious  of  them  in  the  pulpit.  To  many,  if  not 
rarely  used,  they  seem  indicative  of  constitutional  soft- 
ness in  the  preacher.  Excessive  tenderness  disgusts 
their  taste.  They  shrink  from  saccharine  lips,  (why 
Is  it  that  Anglo-Saxon  tastes  do  not  encourage  the  kiss 
between  full-grown  men  ?  The  same  principle  governs 
the  use  of  affectionate  forms  of  appeal. 

12th,  Appeals  should  be  uttered  without  forewarn- 
ing. One  writer  on  hpmiletics  deliberately  recom- 
mends the  following  as  the  proper  preface  to  a  hortatory 
conclusion ;  "  Time  warns  me  to  pause,  and  to  close  sM, 


•  t 


674  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING,     [lbct.  xxxix. 

finally,  with  one  solemn  exhortation ; "  and  this,  also,  as 
another  becoming  formula,  *'  Christian  brethren,  a  word 
of  serious  and  close  application  to  the  conscience  shall 
now  close  this  discourse."  Imagine  Lord  Brougham 
introducing  a  peroration  thus  to  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. Fancy  Gen.  Butler  addressing  a  jury  in  a  crimi- 
nal court  with  such  forewarning  of  his  appeal  at  the 
close.  Some  preachers  commit  this  error  by  a  preface 
which  makes  the  impression  of  laziness.  Bishop  Lowth 
introduces  an  appeal  thus :  "  But  to  draw  to  an  end, 
and  to  make  use  of  what  has  been  said  to  our  future 
establishment,  from  the  foregoing  discourse,  I  shall 
now  draw  a  consideration  or  two,  and  so  conclude." 
Could  any  thing  picture  more  truthfully  the  plodding 
of  the  bishop's  pen  on  his  study-table  ?  A  sportsman 
hunting  a  partridge  has  more  of  oratorical  force  in  his 
very  attitude  than  a  volume  of  such  cathedral  dis- 
course. 

Sometimes  the  forewarning  of  an  exhortation  gives 
to  it  the  look  of  irony.  A  speaker  at  an  anniversary 
in  Boston  rose  on  one  occasion  to  address  an  audience 
of  two  hundred,  in  a  house  capable  of  seating  three 
thousand;  and  he  began  thus,  "I  am  deputized  to 
appeal  to  the  feelings  of  this  audience  to  increase  the 
contribution  which  is  now  to  be  tnken."  One  would 
have  imagined  that  the  contribution-box  would  have 
been  sufficiently  cooling  to  such  an  audience  without  a 
refrigerant  speech  like  that.  What  had  they  to  do  with 
his  being  "deputized"  to  appeal  to  them?  Compare 
this  appeal  with  the  rhetorical  policy  of  the  prophet 
Nathan  in  his  designs  upon  the  conscience  of  David. 
All  forewarning  of  appeals  puts  hearers  at  once  on  the 
defensive.  They  gird  themselves  up,  and  feel  secure 
from  the  attack.     They  are  at  leisure  to  look  out  cf 


lECT.  xxxix.J      THE  CONCLUSION :   APPEALS.  575 

their  loopholes.    An  appeal  should  have  the  skill  and 
the  suddenness  of  an  ambuscade. 

This  ends  our  discussion  of  the  several  parts  of  a  ser- 
mon. Some  remarks  of  a  more  general  character  will 
be  added  in  the  closing  lecture.  For  the  present,  two 
suggestions  deserve  to  be  recoixied* 

One  is  that  the  critical  study  of  the  constitution  of 
discourse  deserves  to  rank  by  the  side  of  the  studj 
of  psychology  as  a  means  of  mental  discipline.  The 
rhetorical  and  mental  sciences  are  close  kindred  to  each 
other.  Neither  can  be  exhaustively  analyzed  without 
incursions  into  the  other.  The  same  is  true  of  the  rela- 
tion of  rhetoric  to  logic.  The  science  of  speech,  and 
the  science  of  thought,  and  the  science  of  thinking 
power,  all  salute  each  other  in  any  thorough  analysis 
and  study  of  them.  Such  was  the  dignity  of  rhetorical 
research  as  represented  by  Aristotle,  the  only  strictly 
original  rhetorician  the  world  has  ever  known. 

The  other  suggestion  is  that  the  habit  of  studying 
plans  of  discourse  should  be  extended  into  seculai 
literature.  The  principles  which  should  govern  the 
literature  of  the  bar  and  the  senate  are  the  same  with 
those  which  should  govern  that  of  the  pulpit.  The 
study  of  them  in  their  secular  applications,  by  preachers 
m  active  service,  tends  to  preserve  them  from  profes- 
sional rDutine,  and  to  render  the  clerical  taste  pure  and 
robust.  Some  of  the  ablest  preachers  in  the  history  of 
tbrt  American  pulpit  have  also  been  lawyers;  and  some 
of  the  ornaments  of  the  American  bar  have  been  vigi 
lant  students  of  the  literature  of  the  pulpit 


LECTURE  XL. 

OOKOLUDING  LECTUEE :   MINISTBRIAL  OTJLTUBB. 

Gentlemen,  I  complete  to-day  the  course  of  homi- 
letic  lectures,  the  delivery  of  which  you  have  made  a 
pleasure  to  me  by  the  kindness  of  your  attention.  I 
am  constrained,  by  certain  convictions  which  are  some- 
times a  burden  to  me,  to  add  a  few  words  of  comment 
upon  the  general  drift  of  the  instructions  to  which  you 
have  listened,  and  the  spirit  in  which  they  should  be 
applied  to  your  life's  work. 

My  treatment  of  the  theory  of  preaching  has  grown 
up,  in  a  course  of  years,  on  that  model  of  homiletic 
teaching  which  the  Calvinistic  mind  has  generally  held 
to  be  essential  to  the  training  of  a  preacher.  The  ideal 
of  a  preacher  which  I  have  uniformly  had  in  view  is 
that  of  a  Christian  scholar  using  his  scholarship  with 
the  aim  of  a  Christian  orator.  I  have  spoken  to  a 
^oup  of  scholarly  hearers,  and  have  aimed  to  help  you 
to  a  more  enlarged  growth  of  scholarly  culture.  I  do 
this  every  year,  with  an  increasing  conviction,  that,  as 
it  respects  intellectual  preparation  for  the  pulpit,  tkis 
high  Calvinistic  ideal  of  a  preacher  is  the  true  one.  I 
can  not  believe  that  any  less  severe  ideal  is  equal  to 
the  range  of  apostolic  thought  on  the  subject. 

At  the  same  time,  I  have  found,  by  the  side  of  this 
conviction,  another,  which  is  also  deepening  with  years, 

876 


U5OT.  XL.]  MINISTERIAL  CULTURE.  677 

I  have  tried,  in  various  parts  of  these  lectures^  to  give 
you  a  hint  of  it  in  the  way  of  warning.  It  is  that  our 
Protestant  denominations  are  not  in  all  respects  using 
this  theory  of  high  culture  in  the  ministry  in  a  Chris- 
tian way.  Somehow  or  other,  it  is  not  working  alto- 
gether right  in  practice.  I  acknowledge  some  alarm 
at  the  prospect  before  us,  if  the  present  drift  of  things, 
in  one  respect,  be  not  arrested.  A  scholarly  ministry, 
taken  as  a  whole,  we  must  confess  is  working  away 
from  the  unscholarly  masses  of  the  people.  Perhaps 
it  would  be  more  strictly  accurate  to  say  that  the 
unscholarly  masses  are  working  away  from  it.  But 
practically  this  makes  no  difference.  The  ministry  is 
in  its  conception  aggressive,  not  receptive.  The  com- 
mission is,  "  Go,"  not  "  Wait." 

In  Great  Britain  the  fact  is  attracting  more  attention 
every  year,  that  the  clergy  and  the  people  are  drifting 
asunder,  and,  I  repeat,  it  makes  no  difference  which  is 
anchored,  if  the  other  is  moving.  The  religious  press 
of  England  and  Scotland  confesses  the  sundering. 
Infidel  critics  triumph  over  it.  "  The  Westminster 
Review "  discusses  the  fact,  as  one  which  candid  men 
will  not  dispute.  "  The  London  Times  "  and  "  The  Sat- 
urday Review  "  explicitly  affirm  that  the  clergy  are  no 
longer  leaders  of  the  religious  thought  of  England 
Reformers  and  statesmen  are  looking  about  them  for 
other  agencies  than  those  of  the  Church  and  the  pulpit 
to  elevate  the  degraded,  and  control  the  "  dangerous  ** 
classes.  Is  it  not  an  ominous  event,  that,  in  a  country 
which  Christianity  has  civilized  for  a  thousand  years, 
vast  masses  of  society  should  be  so  vast  and  so  brutal 
as  to  be  classified  in  the  national  mind  by  that  title 
"dangerous"?  They  are  no  longer  thought  of  by 
statesmen  as  objects  of  hope,  scarcely  even  of  compa» 


d78  THE  THEORY  OP  PREACHING.  [lkct.  xl. 

sion,  but  simply  as  a  threat  hanging  over  the  safety  of 
the  rest.     They  are  given  up  to  the  police. 

In  our  own  country,  with  the  advantages  of  cur  vol- 
untary system  in  the  support  of  the  gospel,  th*  same 
widening  of  the  distance  between  the  Protestant  min- 
istry and  the  masses  is  palpable.  Politicians  accept  the 
fact,  and  act  upon  it.  The  secular  press,  to  a  great 
extent,  treats  it  flippantly.  Meanwhile  what  are  our 
churches  and  ministry  doing  about  it?  Much  that  is 
cheering,  but  somewhat  that  is  not  so. 

In  the  Episcopal  Church  it  is  frequently  claimed,  by  a 
minority,  I  am  glad  to  believe,  that  it  is  the  mission 
peculiar  to  that  branch  of  the  Church  to  reach  the  cul- 
tivated strata  of  society.  Many  times  have  graduates 
of  this  seminary  who  possessed  more  than  the  average 
of  gentlemanly  address,  and  familiarity  with  cultivated 
society,  been  told  that  they  had  too  much  culture  to 
waste  themselves  in  the  charge  of  missionary  churches. 
In  some  cases,  the  gilded  bait  has  been  caught  at. 
Worldly  wisdom  charges  upon  churches  of  Puritan  ori- 
gin, that  they  have  in  them  the  elements  of  low  life ; 
that  their  historical  antecedents  are  not  respectable ; 
that  their  founders  were  low-born  and  low-bred ;  that 
their  social  affinities  are  not  those  of  culture  and  refine- 
ment ;  and  that  therefore  a  re-action  from  them  is  peri- 
odically inevitable.  From  such  argument  one  might 
reasonably  infer  that  the  chief  glory  of  a  church  is  to 
gather  to  its  bosom  the  Slite  of  cultivated  life,  to  min- 
ister to  the  masses  by  churchly  authority  rather  than 
by  sympathy,  and  to  rescue  from  low-bred  sects  the 
"  Martyrs  of  Disgust." 

Yet  in  our  own  churches,  and  in  the  whole  Presby- 
terian group,  the  present  drift  of  things  is,  to  a  con- 
siderable exter\t,  in  the  same  direction.     The  under- 


CJKTT.  xi..]  MINISTERIAL  CULTURE.  679 

current  may  still  be  right  in  the  main ;  but  many  of  the 
Burface-cui rents,  and  certain  local  currents,  are  not  so. 
Our  craving  for  artistic  music,  worldly  views  of  what 
constitutes  ministerial  success,  and,  more  than  all  else, 
the  principle  of  elective  af&nity  in  the  gathering  of 
churches,  by  which  identity  of  social  rank  is  made  to 
mark  practically  the  outline  of  church-membership,  and 
sti'l  more  sharply  that  of  Christian  fellowship,  —  are  all 
tending  the  same  way.    It  is  not  difficult  to  see  whither. 

Yet  the  complaint  is  universal  among  us,  that  a  less 
proportion  of  the  uneducated  masses  of  American  birth 
is  to  be  found  in  Calvinistic  churches  than  was  found 
there  thirty  years  ago.  Christian  men  are  innocently 
wondering,  and  inquiring,  "Why  is  this?"  We  are 
entering  upon  an  era  of  experiments  for  remedying  the 
evil.  I  have  not  a  word  to  say  against  those  experi- 
ments. They  may  all  be  excellent  in  their  way.  They 
are  all  welcome,  as  evidence  that  good  men  are  feeling 
after  the  right  way.  But  this  fact  is  observable  in 
them  thus  far,  that,  to  a  large  extent,  —  not  entirely,  — 
they  either  leave  the  clergy  out  of  the  question,  or 
assign  to  them  a  false  position.  We  are  creating  vast 
organizations  of  lay-laborers,  Sabbath-schools,  mission- 
schools,  mission-chapels,  young  men's  Christian  associa- 
tions, colporters,  Bible-readers,  etc.,  to  reach  the  masses 
of  the  people,  because  of  the  admitted  fact  that  oui 
pulpit,  as  administered  to  our  own  wants  and  tastes 
does  not  reach  them.  We  are  working,  in  great  part 
upon  a  system  which  takes  it  for  granted  that  our  owr 
clergy,  in  our  own  churches,  can  not  reach  them.  In 
some  cases,  the  avowal  is  whispered  that  we  do  not 
want  to  reach  them  there. 

We  are  looking  more  and  more  to  divine  interposi- 
tion in  raising    ip  men  of  exceptionax  zeal  and  tact  as 


a80  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [user,  xl 

evangelists,  at  whose  feet  our  scholarly  and  learned 
clergy  sit  for  instruction,  given  not  always  in  even 
grammatical  English.  That  was  a  most  humiliating 
circumstance  to  the  cultivated  clergy  of  one  of  our 
Atlantic  cities,  that  the  chairman  of  a  meeting  assem- 
bled to  devise  plans  for  the  continuance  of  special  ser- 
vices, and  other  efforts  for  a  revival  of  religion,  told  the 
audience  that  the  evangelist  who  had  been  laboring 
there  would  bring  to  them  certain  clergymen  and  other 
helpers  from  abroad,  who  would  be  qualified  to  carry 
on  the  work.  As  if  the  corps  of  pastors  of  all  de- 
nominations with  which  that  city  was  blessed  —  ad- 
mitted to  be  unsurpassed  in  culture  and  in  training 
for  the  pulpit  —  were  incompetent  for  such  a  service, 
and  exceptional  men,  clerical  and  laical,  must  be  sought 
out,  and  brought  from  afar.  This  surely  is  an  ab- 
normal state  of  things.  It  ought  to  have  set  every 
thoughtful  man  to  searching  below  the  surface  for  the 
causes  and  the  remedy. 

Even  in  the  Methodist  churches,  the  boast  of  which, 
from  the  time  of  John  Wesley,  has  been  their  apostolic 
adaptation  to  the  lower  classes  of  society,  the  same 
complaint  begins  to  be  heard.  Recent  Methodist  au- 
thorities say  that  they  are  losing  in  some  degree  their 
ancient  hold  upon  the  lower  orders  of  the  people. 
They  affirm  that  the  spirit  of  their  denomination  is 
rising  in  the  direction  of  refinement,  of  education,  of 
Bocial  position,  and  pecuniary  beneficence:  but  they 
are  not  lifting  the  masses  with  them  :  they  are  simply 
soaring  overhead.  The  ideal  of  an  educated  ministry 
being  of  recent  origin  in  the  Methodist  Church,  many 
earnest  friends  of  culture  there  think  they  see  that  the 
work  of  clerical  education  is  not  wholly  a  gain.  They 
acknowledge,   thatx  an  their  ministers    become    more 


LKCT.  XI..]  MINISTERIAL  CULTURE.  681 

highly  cultivated,  their  tendency  is  to  work  away  from 
those  portions  of  the  people  which  are  not  so.  Like 
seeks  its  like.  The  danger  is  that  nature  will  out- 
weigh grace.  Their  educated  preachers  and  their  hum- 
ble classes  are  in  peril  of  parting  company,  because 
they  are  in  peril  of  losing  sympathy. 

In  view  of  these  facts,  it  is  not  strange  if  the  whole 
question  of  clerical  education  undergoes  revision.  It 
must  not  be  wondered  at,  if  many  Christian  laymen 
infer  that  our  process  of  cultivation  is  a  destructive 
one.  It  is  not  unnatural  that  one  of  them  should  say, 
as  he  did,  "  Our  ministers  are  educated  to  death ; "  of  ^ 
that  another  should  write,  "  They  are  so  trained  as  to 
make  it  difficult  for  the  churches  to  support  them  with 
their  expensive  tastes ; "  or  that  a  third  should  believe 
that  "they  are  so  cultivated  as  to  indispose  them  to 
become  pastors  of  rural  churches;"  or  that  a  fourth 
should  affirm  that  "they  are  so  made  over  by  ten 
years  of  scholastic  seclusion  as  to  wither  their  godly 
sympathy  with  the  people  everj^where."  All  this,  and 
much  more,  is  said  by  laymen  in  their  conversations 
and  correspondence  on  the  subject.  You  perceive 
inklings  of  it  now  and  then  in  the  reports  of  public 
assemblies. 

I  do  not  indorse  these  criticisms;  far  from  it.  In- 
deed, so  far  as  my  observation  goes,  the  men  who  make 
them  do  not  express  in  them  their  own  personal  wants, 
but  what  they  suppose  to  be  the  wants  of  others.  I 
have  yet  to  find  the  first  layman,  with  intelligence 
enough  to  have  a  reasonable  opinion  on  such  a  subject, 
who  wants  any  other  than  the  first  order  of  intellect, 
and  the  most  perfect  culture,  in  the  person  of  his  own 
pastor.  Still,  such  criticisms  contain  a  truth ;  and  they 
may  become  wholly  true,  unless  the  clergy  prevent  that 


d82  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  fLBOr.  xu 

result,  each  in  his  own  experience.  The  youthful 
clergy  have  a  special  responsibility  respecting  it.  Dr. 
Emmons  said  that  he  never  expected  to  convince  a 
man  of  any  thing  which  he  did  not  already  believe, 
after  the  age  of  forty  years.  There  is  less  of  hyperbole 
in  this  as  applied  to  educated  mind  than  as  applied  to 
the  illiterate.  Clerical  mind,  especially  after  spending 
fifteen  years  in  the  pulpit,  exercising  there  the  authority 
of  a  religious  teacher,  is  apt,  from  that  time  onward, 
to  float  on  currents  of  opinion  formed  and  set  during 
those  years.  The  junior  ministry,  therefore,  must  com- 
monly change  the  currents  of  clerical  practice,  if  they 
need  change. 

I  wish,  therefore,  to  commit  these  homiletic  discus- 
sions to  you  with  the  most  solemn  charge  that  you 
receive  them  with  a  spirit  of  practical  good  sense  and 
of  practical  piety.  These  two  things  are  the  substance 
of  the  whole  matter.  I  have  tried  to  proportion  the 
theory  of  preaching  as  symmetrically  as  I  could.  But 
in  a  thousand  applications  of  it  you  must  do  the  work 
of  adjusting  its  proportions.  You  must  qualify  rules. 
You  must  balance  principles.  You  must  interpret  pre- 
cepts in  the  light  of  circumstances.  You  must  judge 
when  it  is  a  use,  and  when  it  is  an  abuse,  of  any  truth 
you  may  have  heard  here,  to  apply  it  to  your  own  prac- 
tice. Good  sense  and  piety  should  shape  your  applica- 
tions of  it,  as  of  all  knowledge,  and  always  should  so 
shape  them  as  to  make  your  pulpit  reach  the  masses  of 
the  people. 

I  tell  you  frankly,  that  no  theory  of  preaching  is 
worth  a  farthing  which  can  not  be  worked  practically 
to  that  result.  No  theory  of  ministerial  culture  is 
either  scriptural,  or  philosophical,  or  sensible,  which  can 
aot  bridge  the  gulf  between  the  clergy  and  the  masses. 


LBCT.  XL.]  MINISTERIAL  CULTtJRE.  683 

The  pulpit  never  can  accomplish  its  mission  on  any 
such  theory  —  never. 

The  methods  of  lay  labor  which  are  so  popular  at 
present  for  the  evangelizing  of  the  masses,  and  which, 
in  the  main,  are  so  hopeful  a  sign  of  our  times,  are 
defective,  and  will  fail,  just  so  far  as  they  assume  to 
confine  to  laymen  the  duty  of  personal  contact  witH 
the  lower  orders,  and  to  exalt  the  clergy  into  an  upper 
layer  of  influence,  in  which  they  shall  simply  be  preach- 
ers to  select  hearers,  and  teachers  of  teachers,  reaching 
the  people  only  by  proxy.  No  preacher  can  afford 
that  kind  of  seclusion.  Such  an  adjustment  of  powers 
in  the  Church  is  hierarchical.  The  philosophy  of  it  is 
priestly.  It  is  a  return  to  the  genius  of  Judaism  and 
of  Paganism.  Nothing  could  doom  the  clergy  to  a 
wasted  life  more  fatally. 

If  I  could  be  persuaded  that  the  theory  of  minis- 
terial culture  which  I  have  tried  to  represent  to  you 
could  result  legitimately  in  any  such  drifting  asunder 
of  the  pulpit  and  the  lower  orders  of  society,  I  would 
abandon  the  whole  of  it.  I  would  drop  it  as  I  would  a 
viper.  A  preacher  had  better  work  in  the  dark,  with 
nothing  but  mother-wit,  a  quickened  conscience,  and  a 
Saxon  Bible  to  teach  him  what  to  do  and  how  to  do 
it,  than  to  vault  into  an  aerial  ministry  in  which  only 
the  upper  classes  shall  know  or  care  any  thing  about 
him.  You  had  better  go  and  talk  the  gospel  in  tlie 
Cornish  dialect  to  those  miners  who  told  the  witnesses 
summoned  by  the  committee  of  the  English  ParliO' 
ment,  that  they  had  "never  heard  of  Mister  Jesus 
Christ  in  these  mines,"  than  to  do  the  work  of  the 
Bishop  of  London.  Make  your  ministry  reach  the  peo- 
ple; in  the  forms  of  purest  culture  if  you  can,  but 
reach  the  people ;  with  elaborate  doctrine  if  possible, 


084  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [lkot.  xi. 

but  reach  the  people ;  with  classic  speech  if  it  may  be, 
but  reach  the  people.  The  great  problem  of  life  to  an 
educated  ministry  is  to  make  their  culture  a  power, 
instead  of  a  luxury.  Our  temptations  are  all  one  way. 
Our  mission  is  all  the  other  way. 

It  is  not,  then,  less  education  that  our  clei gy  need. 
It  is  inconceivable  to  me  how  any  educated  man  can 
see  relief  from  our  present  dangers,  or  from  any  dan- 
gers, in  that  direction.  Ignorance  is  a  remedy  for 
nothing.  Imperfection  of  culture  is  always  a  misfor- 
tune. 

Some  remarks  made  once  at  a  meeting  of  the  General 
Association  of  Massachusetts,  suggested,  if  correctly 
reported,  a  reduction  of  the  term  of  years  in  our  semi- 
naries for  all  students  of  theology,  and  hinted  at  the 
need  of  "  recovery  "  from  the  influence  of  the  training 
in  theological  seminaries.  Every  truly  educated  man 
knows  better.  We  do  not  want  inferior  culture,  if  we 
can  get  any  thing  else.  The  world  will  not  bear  it 
from  us  when  it  can  command  any  thing  else.  Jf  this 
world  is  ever  to  be  converted  to  Christ  by  other  than 
highly  educated  agencies,  it  must  be  by  the  aid  of 
miraculous  agencies.  Nothing  short  of  inspiration  and 
miracle  ever  has  made  ignorance  and  low  culture  suc- 
cessful in  the  propagation  of  Christianity  on  any  large 
scale  and  for  a  long  period  of  time ;  and  nothing  short 
of  such  powers  ever  can  do  it.  But  miracle  and  inspi- 
ration we  can  not  look  for.  In  place  of  them  we  must 
look  for  consecration  of  culture.  This  is  the  thing 
wldch  the  world  is  blindly  craving.  We  need  subjec- 
tion of  the  personal  tastes,  which  high  culture  creates, 
to  apostolic  and  Christlike  motive.  We  need  content- 
ment under  the  limitations  of  culture,  which  the  neces- 
sities of  labor  in  our  profession  demand.     We  need  ta 


IJK3T.  XL.]  MINISTEBIAL  CULTUBE.  686 

revise  our  theories,  and  moderate  our  desires,  respecting 
pecuniary  support.  Are  we  right,  are  we  apostolic,  in 
the  conviction  that  we  must  live  in  such  a  style  that 
we  can  not  obey  a  call  of  God  and  of  his  Church  to 
the  humblest  fields  of  pastoral  usefulness?  Does  not 
this  conviction  imply  a  mistake  in  our  self-adjustments 
to  the  work  of  Christ  ? 

Above  all,  we  need  faith  in  the  Christian  ideal  of 
culture  which  measures  its  value  by  its  use,  its  dignity 
by  its  lowliness,  its  height  in  character  by  its  depth 
of  reach  after  souls  below  it.  This  was  Christ's  own 
ideal  of  culture.  He  possessed  no  other ;  he  respected 
no  other;  he  denounced  every  other  most  fearfully. 
Not  an  act  of  his  life,  not  a  word  from  his  lips,  gives 
any  evidence  that  he  would  have  tolerated  the  awful 
anomaly  of  clerical  life  in  which  a  man  ministers  pla- 
cidly in  a  palatial  church  to  none  but  elect  and  gilded 
hearers,  with  all  the  paraphernalia  of  elegance  around 
him,  and  with  culture  expressed  in  the  very  fragrance 
of  the  atmosphere;  while  "Five  Poiats,"  and  "Bow- 
eries," and  "  Ann  Streets,"  are  growing  up,  uncared  for 
by  any  labors  of  his,  within  hearing  of  his  organ  and 
bis  quartet. 

Our  guard  against  the  peril  here  indicated,  then,  is 
spiritual,  as  distinct  from  intellectual,  in  its  nature. 
The  cry  should  be,  not  "  Less  intellect,  less  study,  leas 
culture,"  but  simply,  "  More  heart,  more  prayer,  more 
godliness,  more  subjection  of  culture  to  the  salvation 
of  those  who  have  little  or  none  of  it." 

I  beg  you  to  ponder  the  subject  in  this  spirit,  and  to 
begin  your  ministry  with  a  bold  rejection  of  every  thing 
that  implies  your  personal  seclusion  from  the  poor  and 
the  ignorant  classes.  Reject  every  theory  of  preaching 
which  contemplates  that  seclusion  a3  a  necessity.    Reo- 


u 


686  THE  THEOBY  OF  PHEACHING.  [leot.  XL 

tify  the  proportions  of  any  theory,  which,  though  true 
in  its  parts,  yet,  as  a  whole,  blocks  your  way  to  the 
hearts  of  the  people.  Prune  down  any  theory,  which, 
for  reasons  yet  unknown  to  you,  you  can  not  work  to 
advantage,  so  as  to  make  your  way  to  the  people's 
hearts.  Stretch  your  theory  to  the  facts  of  your  life's 
work,  be  they  what  they  may.  Hold  no  theory  for  a 
day  which  is  not  elastic  enough  to  compass  the  neces- 
sities of  your  position.  I  have  failed  in  my  endeavors 
to  help  you,  if  you  have  derived  from  my  words  any 
such  theory. 

Esteem  no  institution  sacred  which  sets  you  above 
and  aloof  from  the  commonalty.  Revere  no  clerical 
usages,  no  laws  of  etiquette,  no  guards  of  your  reputa- 
tion, no  proprietary  claims,  which  require  you  to  hold 
back  from  personal  labor  with  the  humblest  or  the  most 
guilty.  Yield  to  no  churchly  sentiments,  or  whispered 
arrangements,  or  tacit  understandings,  or  unuttered 
disgusts,  through  which  churches  shall  be  gathered  by 
the  law  of  social  affinity,  instead  of  the  law  of  benevo- 
lence ;  so  that  their  pastors  can  not  get  at  the  poor  and 
the  degraded,  because  there  are  none  such  within 
hearing. 

Refuse  to  be  pastors  of  such  churches,  if  they  insist 
upon  their  exclusiveness.  Accept,  rather,  the  calls 
of  the  "low-born  and  low-bred."  Accept  the  "plain 
living  and  high  thinking,"  if  they  are  necessary  to  give 
you  access  to  the  low  grounds  of  society,  unless  you 
can  clearly  justify  to  your  own  conscience  your  right 
and  duty  to  do  otherwise.  Let  it  be  said  of  you,  "  This 
man  eateth  with  publicans  and  sinners,"  unless  you  can 
give  a  reason  to  ministering  angels  and  to  God  for 
choosing  rather  to  eat  with  princes  and  magnates  of  the 
earth.    Refuse  to  be  tempted  by  churches  in  which 


6BCT.  XL.]  MIKISTERIAL  CULTURE.  687 

pageantry  of  architecture,  pomp  of  worship,  operatic 
music,  patrician  caste,  sumptuous  dress,  and  other  forms 
of  unchristian  luxury  will  conspire  against  you,  making 
it  impossible  for  the  poor  to  be  there  if  they  would, 
and  making  them  unwilling  to  be  there  if  they  could. 
The  man  was  never  born  who  could  long  carry  the  load 
of  such  a  church  as  that  with  a  Christ-like  love  of 
souls  in  his  heart. 

The  spirit  which  should  lead  you  anywhere  into 
Christian  work  should  be  that  which  we  commonly 
laud  as  the  missionary  spirit.  That  type  of  character 
and  that  habit  of  mind  which  time  has  clothed  with 
romance  in  the  persons  of  Henry  Martyn,  and  William 
Carey,  and  Alexander  Duff,  are  the  same  which  should 
carry  any  man  anywhere  as  a  preacher  of  Christ.  In 
no  other  spirit  is  a  man  called  to  preach  at  all. 

Begin,  I  pray  you,  begin  your  work,  with  faith  in  the 
practicability  of  this.  Believe  that  you  can  go  to  your 
metropolitan  pulpit  in  Boston,  or  New  York,  with  the 
same  Christ-like  mind  with  which  you  would  expect 
to  go  to  Beyroot,  or  to  the  Zulus.  There  is  no  differ- 
ence between  the  two.  The  call  of  God  which  sum- 
mons you  to  the  pulpit  means  the  same  thing  every- 
where. If  you  do  not  feel  this,  if  the  missionary 
question  does  not  leave  you  here  at  home  with  entire 
repose  of  conscience,  if  you  are  entering  on  your  life's 
work  here  on  a  lower  level  of  Christian  life  than  you 
would  think  necessary  if  yrm  sought  commission  from 
foreign  missionary  boards,  be  sure  that  you  are  begin- 
ning wrong.  You  are  not  yet  at  peace  with  God  in 
this  thing.     It  is  not  God's  call  that  you  hear. 

Look  at  the  elder  President  Edwards.  What  do  we 
know  of  him  ?  We  know  him  as  a  philosopher.  We 
know  him  as  pastor  of  one  of  the  then  most  powerful 


588  THE  THEORY  OF  PREACHING.  [user,  xi 

churches  of  New  England.  We  know  him  as  president 
of  one  of  the  most  venerable  colleges  of  America.  We 
know  him  as  the  humble  missionary  to  the  Indians  at 
Stockbridge.  Yet  is  he  not  in  all  these  positions  of 
ministerial  labor  the  same  kind  of  man  in  character? 
Did  not  the  same  consecration  lead  him  to  every  one  of 
them  ?  Did  not  the  same  type  of  Christian  life  move 
him  to  write  the  "  Essay  on  the  Will,"  which  dictated 
his  sermon  at  Enfield,  and  his  missionary  talks  at 
Stockbridge?  As  the  peer  and  the  rival  of  David 
Hume  and  John  Locke,  does  he  not  seem  to  us  pre- 
cisely the  same  Christ-like  man  that  he  was  as  the 
biblical  teacher  of  Pequot  children  ? 

That  is  the  true  ideal  of  a  Christian  minister.  He 
should  be  able  to  go,  without  a  ripple  of  difference  in 
his  sense  of  personal  distinction,  to  the  Feejee  Islands, 
or  to  the  Fifth  Avenue  in  New  York.  Pass  on  to  your 
work,  brethren,  in  that  spirit  of  profound  consecration 
and  repose  of  conscience.  Get  down  to  those  deep 
soundings  of  the  sea  of  the  life  that  is  with  God.'^  Then 
God  will  make  your  life  a  song  to  you. 


APPENDIX. 

HOMILBTIO  AND   PASTORAL  STUDIES. 

A  COURSE  of  lectures  on  homiletics,  in  a  professional  seminary, 
must  necessarily  be  fragmentary.  It  has  been  my  habit  to  pre- 
serve a  record  of  topics  belonging  to  this  department  and  to  the 
twin  department  of  pastoral  theology,  the  large  majority  of  whicn 
are  not  discussed  in  the  foregoing  pages.  These  topics  have  been 
suggested  by  the  criticism  of  manuscript  sermons,  by  the  inquiries 
of  students,  by  letters  from  clergymen  and  intelligent  laymen,  and 
by  my  professional  and  general  reading.  They  are  now  the  relic 
of  earlier  years,  in  which  I  hoped  to  discuss  these  subjects, 
either  orally  or  through  the  press.  On  many  of  them  I  have  pre- 
pared lectures  which  I  have  found  no  time  to  deliver.  On  others 
I  have  lectured  extemporaneously.  But  the  chief  value  of  them 
is  found  in  the  hints  which  they  give  oi  the  range  of  study  which 
is  open  to  a  studious  pastor  in  the  direct  line  of  his  professional 
work,  —  a  range  which  the  studies  of  a  lifetime  can  not  exhaust. 
They  seem  to  me  important  enough  to  be  recorded  as  an  appendix 
to  the  present  volume.  Thoss  which  belong  to  pastoral  theology 
will  not  be  found  in(»agnious  with  the  rest.  I  give  them  sub- 
stantially as  I  find  them  among  my  papers,  with  only  such  general 
grouping  as  is  necessary  to  save  them  from  apparent  disorder.  I 
hope  that  they  will,  at  least,  suggest  some  worthy  conception  of 
the  dignity  of  the  pastoral  ofl&ce  as  the  object  of  a  life's  labor. 

I.  The  first  group  of  these  topics  concerns  the  homiletic  treat- 
ment of  the  Being  of  God.  1.  Is  the  Being  of  God  a  proper  sub- 
ject of  argument  or  discussion  in  the  pulpit?  2.  Ought  purely 
scientific  atheism  to  be  treated  in  popular  preaching?  3.  The  uses 
and  abuses  of  the  argument  from  the  human  conscience  for  the 
divine  existence.  4.  How  should  that  type  of  infidelity  be  treated 
which  reoognizes  moral  government  without  a  moral  goyemor  7 


590  APPENDIX. 

5.  Shonld  the  doctrine  of  evolntion  be  discussed  in  the  pulpit  T 
If  so,  in  what  way  ? 

n.     A  second  group  of  topics  concerns  the  Attributes  of  God, 

1.  How  can  the  attributes  of  God  be  best  classified  and  repre- 
sented in  the  pulpit,  for  popular  impression  ?  2.  The  value  of 
the  divine  attributes  as  themes  of  sermons  in  times  of  religious 
revival.  3.  The  limitations  upon  the  use  of  the  human  mind  as 
an  image  of  the  divine  mind.  4.  Should  the  divine  sense  of 
right  be  represented  as  an  authority  to  the  divine  mind  ?  5.  Can 
the  popular  mind  conceive  of  divine  suffering  without  loss  to  ita 
thought  of  divine  perfection  ?  6.  Defects  of  the  ordinary  methoda 
of  preaching  on  the  attributes  of  God.  7.  A  plan  of  a  series  of 
sermons  upon  the  attributes  of  God. 

ni.  A  third  collection  of  inquiries  clusters  around  the  doctrine 
of  The  Trinity.  1.  Should  the  Trinity  be  preached  as  a  whole,  or 
by  preaching  the  Deity  of  God  in  each  one  of  his  three  modes  of 
existence?  2.  Ought  the  Trinity  to  be  represented  by  the  use 
of  the  word  '^  persons"?  3.  Ought  the  Trinity  to  be  taught  as 
a  doctrine  of  the  Old  Testament  ?  4.  Ought  the  modem  pulpit 
to  concern  itself  with  the  doctrine  of  the  "eternal  generation  "  of 
Christ  ?  5.  Can  the  theory  of  a  double  consciousness  in  Christ  be 
usefully  taught  in  the  pulpit?  6.  Should  the  personahty  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  be  taught  as  an  essential  doctrine  of  Christianity? 
7.  How  shall  the  pulpit  use  those  texts  which  seem  to  speak  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  and  Christ  interchangeably  ?  8.  Can  the  pulpit 
profitably  use  any  intimations  of  Trinity  derived  from  other 
sources  than  the  Scriptures?  9.  How  shall  the  popular  sense  of 
contradiction  in  the  doctrine  be  treated  ?  10.  What  analogies  are 
most  useful  in  illustrating  the  Trinity?  11.  How  can  the  deity 
and  the  humanity  of  Christ  be  represented,  so  that  neither  shall 
impair  the  popular  sense  of  the  other?  12.  How  shall  that  theory 
of  Christ's  person  be  treated  which  represents  him  as  superhuman, 
yet  not  an  object  of  worship?  13.  A  plan  of  a  single  sermon  — 
also  of  three  sermons — on  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity. 

IV.  A  fourth  list  of  topics  centers  in  the  subject  of  the 
Inspiration  of  the  Scriptures.  1.  Is  Dr.  Arnold  right  in  conceding 
that  the  doctrine  does  not  admit  of  definition  to  the  popular  mind? 

2.  Does  the  popular  conception  of  inspiration  need  revision?  3. 
WTiat  is  the  most  useful  line  of  argument  in  the  popular  treatment 
of  inspiratiopV    4.  Wliat  use,  if  any,  should  be  made  of  othei 


HOMILBTIC  Ain)  PASTORAL  STUDIES.  691 

forms  of  mental  illumination  to  illustrate  biblical  inspiration  T 

5.  What  is  the  bearing  of  inspiration  on  the  literary  character  of 
the  Bible?  6.  Are  discussions  of  the  canon  of  the  Scriptures 
desirable  in  the  pulpit  ?  7.  T\Tiat  difference,  if  any,  should  be 
taught  between  the  Old  and  the  New  Testaments,  respecting  their 
inspiration?  8.  How  should  popular  faith  in  dreams  and  visions, 
as  iorms  of  divine  revelation,  be  treated?  9.  How  should  the 
pulpit  treat  the  drift  of  modern  Christian  thought  which  tends  to 
dispense  with  inspired  authority  in  religion?  10.  Should  the 
Swedenborgian  theory  of  inspiration  be  discussed  in  a  sermon? 
11.  A  series  of  plans  of  lectures  to  the  people  on  inspiration. 

V.  The  fifth  class  of  topics  relates  to  the  Creation  and  the  Fall. 

1.  Ought  the  pulpit  to  treat  the  narrative  in  Genesis  as  history? 

2.  How  shall  its  adjustment  to  the  facts  of  modem  science  be 
made  clear  to  the  popular  mind?  3.  How  should  objections  to  the 
biblical  account  of  the  Temptation  be  treated  in  preaching?  4. 
Is  it  expedient  to  attempt  a  popular  discussion  of  the  literary 
history  of  the  biblical  record  of  the  Creation  ?  5.  How  should 
the  unity  of  the  human  race  be  treated  in  preaching  ?  6.  A  plan 
of  a  series  of  sermons  on  the  Creation  and  the  Fall  of  Man. 

VI.  A  sixth  group  of  topics  is  gathered  around  the  doctrine  of 
the  Natural  Character  of  Man.  1.  How  can  the  natural  antipathy 
of  hearers  to  this  doctrine  be  overcome?  2.  A  review  of  John 
Foster's  essay  on  "  The  Aversion  of  Men  of  Taste  to  Evangelical 
Religion."  3.  Ought  the  moral  nature  of  man  to  be  represented 
by  the  phrase  "total  depravity"?  4.  Ought  the  consequences  of 
the  Fall  to  the  character  of  the  race  to  be  represented  by  the 
phrase  "original  sin"?  5.  How  shall  the  popular  sense  of  in- 
justice under  the  doctrine  of  inherited  depravity  be  removed? 

6.  By  what  rhetorical  auxiliaries  to  the  doctrine  of  depravity  can 
the  popular  conscience  be  quickened  to  a  biblical  sense  of  sin  ? 

7.  Ought  sin  to  be  represented  as  the  penalty  of  sin?  8.  How 
shall  we  make  the  distinction  palpable  between  depravity  and  sin? 
9.  How  should  the  pulpit  treat  the  unpardonable  sin?  10.  Otight 
the  pulpit  to  discuss  the  character  of  infants  ?  and,  if  ao,  what 
should  be  its  teaching?  11.  How  are  the  biblical  representations 
of  the  divine  authorship  of  sin  to  be  explained  to  the  popular 
comprehension?  12.  Is  the  Freedom  of  the  Will  a  proper  subject 
tor  discussion  in  the  pulpit?  13.  How  shall  the  popular  sense  of 
the  rectitude  of  natural  affections  be  met  in  preaching  the  fact  oi 


592  APPENDIX. 

entire  sinfulness  7  14.  Does  the  modem  Church  need  admonition 
against  ascetic  self-examination?  15.  A  series  of  plans  of  sermons 
on  the  Depravity  of  Man. 

Vn.  A  seventh  cluster  of  inquiries  finds  its  center  in  the 
doctrine  of  the  Atonement,  1.  Ought  the  theory  of  a  limited 
Atonement  to  be  specifically  treated  in  the  pulpit?  2.  To  what 
extent  should  the  philosophy  of  the  Atonement  be  discussed  in 
preaching  ?  3.  Ought  any  theory  of  the  Atonement  to  be  presented 
as  covering  all  the  reasons  for  its  necessity?  4.  How  shall  w© 
guard  the  faith  in  an  unlimited  Atonement  against  the  abuse  of  it 
towards  the  doctrine  of  universal  salvation,  in  the  theology  of 
the  people?  5.  How  shall  we  guard  the  doctrine  against  Anti- 
nomian  abuses  in  practice?  6.  How  shall  we  protect  the  doctrine 
from  that  abuse  of  it  which  ascribes  vindictiveness  to  God  ?  7. 
What  should  the  pulpit  teach  respecting  the  suffering  of  the  Deity 
in  the  Atonement?  8.  What  should  the  pulpit  teach  of  the  cravings 
of  the  human  conscience  as  giving  intimations  of  the  nature  of  the 
Atonement  ?  9.  Of  the  several  theories  of  the  Atonement,  is  it 
wise  to  present  any  other  than  the  one  which  is  to  be  defended? 

10.  Does  the  doctrine  of  Justification  by  Faith  require  now  the 
prominence  given  to  it  by  the  Reformers  of  the  sixteenth  century? 

11.  Should  the  ancient  distinction  of  the  offices  of  Christ,  as  those 
of  prophet,  priest,  and  king,  be  made  obvious  in  the  methods  of 
the  modem  pulpit?  12.  A  plan  of  a  series  of  sermons  on  the 
Atonement. 

Vin.  An  eighth  group  of  topics  relate  to  the  doctrine  of  Regen- 
eration. 1.  How  should  the  subject  of  impenitent  prayer  for  regen- 
eration be  treated?  2.  How  should  religious  inquirers  be  addressed, 
who  profess  to  be  waiting  for  regenerating  grace?  3.  How  can 
the  necessity  of  regeneration  be  reconciled,  to  the  popular  satisfac- 
tion, with  the  duty  of  immediate  repentance  ?  4.  Is  it  expedient 
to  pi"each  either  of  the  two  doctrines,  regeneration  and  repentance 
without  allusion  to  the  other  ?  5.  To  what  extent  may  the  philoso- 
phy of  the  human  mind  be  used  in  interpreting  the  biblical  symbols 
of  regeneration  ?  6.  Ought  man's  ability  to  repent  to  be  taught 
expressly,  or  only  by  implication  in  his  responsibility  ?  7.  Should 
preachers  exhort  men  to  use  the  means  of  regeneration  ?  6.  How 
shall  the  difference  between  regeneration  and  miracle  be  made 
clear  to  the  popular  mind?  9.  In  preaching  the  two  doctrines  of 
ability  and  depeDdence,  under  what  conditions  should  either  take 


HOMILBTIC  AND  PASTORAL  STUDIES.  698 

precedence  of  the  other?  10.  Should  Dr.  Bushnell's  theory  of 
Christian  nurture  be  preached  ?  11.  A  series  of  plans  of  sermons 
on  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

IX.  A  ninth  collection  of  topics  surrounds  the  subject  of  Retri' 
hution.  1.  Should  any  experience  of  this  life  be  represented  as 
retributive  ?  2.  How  shall  a  morbid  conscience  in  afflicted  men 
be  treated  ?  3.  May  the  pulpit  properly  be  silent  as  to  the  dura- 
tion of  future  punishment  ?  4.  May  the  question  of  a  future  pro- 
bation be  safely  left  unanswered  ?  5.  How  shall  the  belief  of  the 
Church  in  endless  retribution  be  made  a  practical  faith  ?  6.  How 
shall  the  pulpit  meet  the  popular  objection  to  the  doctrine  that 
faith  in  it  can  not  consist  with  a  happy  life?  7.  The  uses  and  the 
limitations  of  the  illustration  of  divine  by  human  government. 
8.  Ought  preachers  to  represent  retributive  woe  as  the  result  of 
natural  law  only  ?  9.  How  shall  the  conflict  between  the  tradi- 
tions of  the  pulpit  and  the  testimony  of  physicians,  respecting  the 
remorse  of  the  impenitent  on  death-beds,  be  treated  ?  10.  How  is 
the  tendency  of  refined  culture  to  ignore  this  doctrine  to  be  over- 
come ?  11.  What  is  the  relative  value  of  the  argument  from  rea- 
son as  compared  with  that  of  the  argument  from  the  Scriptures  for 
this  doctrine  ?  12.  How  ought  the  conflict  of  authorities  in  the  in- 
terpretation of  the  Scriptures  upon  this  doctrine  to  be  treated  by 
preachers  ?  13.  The  use  and  the  abuse  of  the  biblical  narrative 
about  Lazarus  and  Dives.  14.  What  use  should  be  made  of  the 
biblical  symbols  of  future  punishment,  by  the  pulpit  ?  15.  What 
proportion  should  be  given,  in  popular  discussion  of  the  doctrine 
to  eternal  suffering  as  compared  with  eternal  sin  ?  16.  What  ac- 
companiments of  style  and  elocution  should  attend  the  preaching  of 
retribution  ?  17.  How  should  a  pastor  treat  suspense  of  faith  in 
the  doctrine,  on  the  part  of  believers  who  have  lost  impenitent 
friends  ?  18.  What  are  the  most  important  auxiliaries  to  the  doc- 
trine in  the  popular  faith?  19.  Does  the  popular  theology  at 
present  need  to  be  guarded  against  excessive  conceptions  of  divine 
justice,  as  related  to  those  of  divine  love  ?  20.  How  can  the  in- 
trinsic loveliness  of  divine  justice  be  made  vivid  to  the  popular 
thought  ?  21.  Should  the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment  be  often 
preached  expressly  ?  22.  A  series  of  plans  of  sermons,  covering 
the  whole  doctrine  of  Retribution. 

X.  A  tenth  group  of  topics  concerns  the  subject  of  The  Res^ 
urreation  of  the  Body.    1.  Is  it  sufficient  for  practical  usee  to  teack 


594  AFFBKDIX. 

the  immortality  of  the  soul  ?    2.  How  shonld  the  pulpit  treat  thf 

apparent  teaching  of  two  resurrections  in  the  Scriptures  ?  3,  Does 
natural  science  require  any  modification  of  the  obvious  meaning 
of  1  Corinthians,  fifteenth  chapter?  4.  What  notice  should  the 
pulpit  take  of  scientific  objections  to  the  doctrine?  5.  How  shall 
the  natural  recoil  of  the  human  mind  from  disembodied  existence  be 
treated?  6.  "What  analogies  of  nature  are  most  effective  in  illus- 
trating and  impressing  the  fact  of  resurrection  ?  7.  Should  the 
body  of  our  Lord  at  the  time  of  his  transfiguration  be  represented 
as  an  illustration  of  the  spiritual  body  of  believers?  8.  What 
shall  the  pulpit  teach  of  the  "  second  advent,"  and  its  sequences? 
9.  The  historic  fact  of  our  Lord's  resurrection  —  should  the  people 
now  hold  it  in  the  same  relation  to  faith  in  his  teachings  in  which 
it  was  held  by  the  Apostles  ?  10.  The  adornment  of  popular  ceme- 
teries as  an  auxiliary  to  religious  culture.  11.  A  brief  series  of 
plans  of  sermons  on  the  Resurrection. 

XI.  An  eleventh  class  of  subjects  relates  to  the  Biblical  Doc- 
trine of  Heaven.  1.  How  can  the  pulpit  create  the  home-feeling 
in  the  popular  anticipation  of  heaven?  2.  How  shall  we  make 
heaven  a  reality  to  hearers  as  a  place  ?  as  a  state  of  activity  and 
spiritual  development  ?  as  a  state  of  organized  society  ?  3.  How 
shall  we  treat  the  traditional  sabbatical  idea  of  heaven  ?  4.  How 
can  we  make  heaven  attractive  to  children?  5.  How  shall  we 
treat  the  subject  of  the  Recognition  of  Friends  in  Heaven  ?  6.  Is 
the  pulpit  justified  in  teaching  the  continuance  in  heaven  of  any  of 
the  social  relations  which  exist  on  earth  ?  7.  How  shall  the  tradi- 
tions of  literary  fiction  respecting  the  eternity  of  conjugal  affection 
be  treated?  8.  To  what  extent  may  the  pulpit  indulge  in  conjec- 
tural discussion  of  the  heavenly  life?  9.  How  shall  we  most 
effectually  make  the  person  of  Christ  central  in  the  popular  thought 
of  heaven  ?  10.  What  is  the  legitimate  use  of  the  biblical  sym- 
bols of  heaven  and  its  conditions  ?  11  How  shall  the  pulpit  treat 
the  subject  of  the  intermediate  state?  12.  What  use,  if  any,  can 
the  pulpit  make  of  the  visions  and  preternatural  hearing  of  the 
dying  ?  13.  Has  the  singular  pre-eminence  given  to  music  in  the 
biblical  representations  of  heaven  any  occult  significance  ?  14. 
Should  that  form  of  Christian  experience  which  consists  of  habit- 
ual meditation  upon  heaven  and  its  employments  be  urged  upon 
Christians  ?     15.  A  series  of  plans  of  sermons  on  Heaven. 

Xn.     A  twelfth  cluster  of  themes  gathers  around  the  Angelologf 


HOMILETIC  AND  PASTORAL  STUDIES.  695 

•f  the  Scriptures.  1.  What  are  the  proper  uses  of  the  biblical 
angelology  in  the  modern  pulpit  ?  2.  Has  the  Protestant  recoil 
from  Romanism  on  this  subject  been  excessive  ?  and  does  it  need 
correction?  3.  What  shall  we  teach  on  the  subject  of  guardian 
angels  ?  4.  Should  we  teach  the  agency  of  departed  human  spir- 
its in  earthly  ministrations  ?  5.  What  treatment  shall  the  pulpit 
give  to  modem  Spiritualism  ?  6.  Ought  preachers  to  discuss  the 
extent  of  sin  in  other  portions  of  the  universe  ?  7.  Should  we 
represent  Satan  as  a  person  ?  and  is  it  wise  to  suggest  to  the  pop- 
ular mind  the  opposite  theory,  by  discussing  it  ?  8.  Does  modem 
Christian  thought  equal  the  Scriptures  in  its  recognition  of  the 
agency  of  evil  spirits  ?  9.  Has  the  biblical  witchcraft  any  mod- 
em counterpart  ?  10.  Do  the  Scriptures  teach  the  cessation  of 
demoniacal  possession  ?  11.  How  should  we  treat  the  representa- 
tion of  Satan  in  the  Book  of  Job  ?  12.  The  extra-biblical  angel- 
ology of  Milton.  13.  A  series  of  plans  of  sermons  on  Good  and 
Evil  Angels  as  represented  in  the  Bible. 

Xni.  A  brief  list  of  inquiries  centers  in  the  subject  of  Miracles. 
1.  What  is  the  exact  use  of  miracles  in  the  teachings  of  the  mod- 
em pulpit  ?  2.  What  principles  should  govern  a  preacher  in  cases 
of  doubt  as  to  the  miraculous  character  of  a  biblical  event  ?  3. 
How  shall  the  pulpit  meet  the  objections  of  science  to  miracles,  so 
as  to  command  the  popular  faith  ?  4.  Is  the  story  of  Jonah  to  be 
treated  as  allegory  ?  5.  Is  the  necessity  of  miracles  in  proof  of 
Christianity  limited  to  times,  or  classes  of  mind  ?  6.  What  are 
the  chief  abuses  of  miracles  in  the  usage  of  the  pulpit  ?  7.  How 
shall  preachers  treat  the  alleged  modern  Romish  miracles?  8. 
How  shall  the  popular  confusion  of  spiritualistic  phenomena  with 
miracles  be  treated  ? 

XIV.  A  fourteenth  group  of  topics  relates  to  the  subject  of 
Prayer.  1.  What  is  prayer  considered  as  literary  composition,  — 
prose,  or  poetry  ?  2.  How  shall  a  preacher  combine  facility  with 
spirituality  in  public  prayer  ?  3.  The  substance,  the  form,  the 
erder,  and  the  delivery  of  public  prayer.  4.  Ought  public  prayer 
to  be  premeditated  ?  5.  The  abuse  of  prayer  to  the  purposes  of 
preaching.  6.  What  instruction  should  the  pulpit  give  on  the  sub- 
ject of  biblical  sortilege  as  practiced  by  the  Moravians  ?  7.  How 
can  preaching  most  effectually  train  a  church  to  the  development 
of  power  in  prayer  ?  8.  How  should  honest  skepticism  as  to  the 
reality  of  prayer  be  treated  ?    9.  To  what  extent,  and  how,  should 


596  APPENDIX. 

sciantific  objections  to  prayer  be  discussed  in  the  pnlpit?      W. 

What  public  use  may  a  preacher  properly  make  of  his  personal 
experience  in  prayer?  11.  Should  the  pulpit  encourage  audible 
responses  to  public  prayer?  12.  Does  the  usefulness  of  public 
worship  require  the  revival  of  liturgies  in  non-prelatical  churches  V 
13.  Is  it  expedient  to  open  churches  for  daily  prayer?  14.  To 
what  extent  should  private  requests  for  public  prayer  be  encour- 
aged? 15.  How  should  the  alleged  cure  of  disease  by  prayer 
alone  be  treated  ?  16.  To  what  extent  should  the  details  of  the 
sermon  be  recognized  in  the  structure  of  the  prayer  preceding  or 
following  it  ?  17.  How  shall  the  pulpit  reconcile  unanswered 
prayer  with  the  specific  promises  of  the  Scriptures  ?  18.  A  series 
of  plans  of  sermons  on  the  reality  of  prayer,  conditions  of  success 
in  prayer,  unanswered  prayer,  the  relation  of  prayer  to  Christian 
activity.  Another  series  on  public,  social,  family,  and  secret 
prayer.  A  third  series  on  the  chief  examples  of  prayer  recorded 
in  the  Scriptures. 

XY.  Another  collection  of  topics  gathers  around  the  subject  of 
Missions.  1.  Should  missions  to  the  heathen  be  advocated  on  the 
ground,  that,  as  the  rule,  heathenism  results  in  the  loss  of  the  soul  ? 
2.  To  what  extent  is  the  history  of  missions  a  valuable  subject  of 
discourse  in  the  pulpit  ?  3.  Ought  uninspired  missionaries  to  be 
made  the  subject  of  biographical  sermons?  4.  How  may  foreign 
missions  be  best  protected  from  the  spirit  of  romance  in  the  Church? 
5.  What  are  the  right  proportions  of  interest  in  foreign  as  related 
to  home  missions,  and  how  can  they  be  preserved  ?  6.  How  should 
monthly  concerts  be  conducted  ?  7.  Should  the  pulpit  teach  the 
Jewish  principle  of  tithes  iu  the  contribution  of  property  to  reli- 
gious uses  ?  8.  How  can  the  pulpit  most  successfully  develop  the 
missionary  spirit  in  the  Church  ? 

XVI.  Another  group  of  topics  relates  to  Social  and  Political 
Reforms.  1.  What  is  the  province  of  the  pulpit  respecting  political 
I  arties  in  the  Republic  ?  2.  What  relation  has  the  pulpit  to  those 
reforms  which  are  an  outgrowth  from  Christianity  ?  3.  The  poli- 
cy of  dependence  upon  the  indirect  influence  of  the  pulpit  for  the 
support  of  Christian  reforms.  4.  How  shall  the  pulpit  best  per- 
form its  duty  in  relieving  the  mutual  hostility  of  classes  in  modem 
society?  5.  How  should  we  preach  on  the  Seventh  Command- 
ment ?  6.  Should  abstinence  from  alcoholic  drinks  be  taught  as  a 
duty  per  ««,  or  on  grounds  of  expediency  only  ?    7.  What  use 


HOMILBTIO  AND  PAflTOKAL  STUDIES.  697 

should  the  pulpit  make  of  the  personal  example  of  Christ  respect* 
ing  the  use  of  wine?  8.  Are  reforms  properly  made  tests  of 
church-membership  ?  9.  How  shall  the  pulpit  treat  the  frequent 
aflaiiation  of  reform  with  infidelity  ? 

XVn.  A  seventeenth  class  of  inquiries  concerns  the  subject  of 
Revivals.  1.  What  is  the  true  theory  of  a  revival  ?  2.  Are  revi- 
vals the  normal  method  of  the  growth  of  the  Church  ?  3.  Are 
the  laws  of  the  working  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  revivals  discovera- 
ble ?  4.  Is  a  revival  always  practicable  to  the  prayers  and  efforts 
of  a  church  ?  5.  What  agency  of  the  pulpit  is  preparative  to  a 
revival  ?  6.  Under  what  conditions  should  public  religious  ser- 
vices be  multiplied  in  revivals  ?  7.  Are  the  labors  of  evangelists 
desirable  under  a  settled  ministry  ?  8.  What  executive  ma- 
chinery may  be  wisely  employed  in  revivals  ?  9.  What  type  of 
theology  is  most  effective  in  revivals  ?  10.  What  place  should 
be  assigned  to  doctrinal  preaching  in  religious  awakenings  ?  11. 
How  may  the  service  of  song  be  made  most  effective  as  an  auxil- 
iary in  such  awakenings  ?  12.  What  are  the  pathological  perils 
incident  to  sympathetic  religious  excitement?  How  avoided? 
How  treated  when  not  avoidable  ?  13.  How  should  the  disin- 
clination of  refined  culture  to  sympathetic  religious  awakenings 
be  treated  ?  14.  What  should  be  the  treatment  of  children  under 
the  excitement  of  a  revival?  what  of  their  admission  to  the 
church  ?  15.  Does  the  subsidence  of  a  revival  indicate  religious 
decline?  16.  What  should  be  the  policy  of  the  pulpit  in  the 
period  immediately  following  a  season  of  revival?  17.  What 
preaching  is  best  fitted  to  the  training  of  recent  converts  and  the 
testing  of  conversions  ?  18.  Is  President  Edwards's  work  on  the 
" Religious  Affections "  suited  to  the  present  generation?  19.  Is 
President  Edwards's  sermon  entitled  "  Sinners  in  the  Hands  of  an 
Angry  God"  a  suitable  model  of  comminatory  preaching  in  a 
modem  revival  ?  20.  What  manuals  of  Christian  experience  are 
most  valuable  for  the  reading  of  young  converts  ?  21.  The  com- 
parative power,  purity,  and  worth  of  modem  and  ancient  religious 
awakenings.     22.  A  series  of  plans  of  sermons  on  Revivals. 

XVin.  The  next  group  of  inquiries  finds  its  center  in  the 
idea  of  Proportion  in  Preaching.  1.  In  argumentative  preaching, 
what  proportions  should  be  given  to  the  Bible,  to  reason,  to  intui- 
tion, and  to  tradition,  as  sources  of  proof  ?  2.  In  the  choice  of  sub- 
jects, wha'^  proportions  should  be  given  to  explanatory,  illustrative, 


598  APFSNDIX. 

argumentative,  and  hortatory  preaching?     3.  How  should  th< 

proportions  be  adjusted  between  topical,  textual,  and  expository 
discourses?  4.  What  should  be  the  proportion  of  comminatory 
to  encouraging  sermons  ?  5.  What  proportion  should  be  aimed  at 
in  the  use  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the  New  ?  6.  What  should 
be  the  proportion  of  negative  to  positive  methods  of  discussion  ? 

7.  In  what  proportion  should  preaching  be  controversy  with  in- 
fidelity? 8.  What  proportion  of  preaching  should  be  on  the 
person,  life,  teachings,  works,  and  death  of  Christ  ?  9.  What 
should  be  the  proportion  of  preaching  to  believers,  and  preaching 
to  the  impenitent  ?  10.  How  shall  preaching  develop  most  health- 
fully the  active  and  the  passive  graces  in  Chiistian  character? 
11.  How  shall  the  doctrinal  perspective  in  the  faith  of  the  people 
be  kept  from  distortions  and  extremes?  12.  What  should  be 
the  proportion  of  written  to  extemporaneous  sermons?  13.  What 
should  be  the  proportion  of  serial  preaching  to  that  of  isolated 
sermons  ?  14.  How  can  the  pulpit  adjust  in  due  proportion  the 
conservative  and  the  progressive  tendencies  in  Christian  thought 
and  action  ? 

XIX.  Another  group  of  topics  clusters  around  the  subject  of 
Church  Polity.  1.  To  what  extent  is  it  wise  to  interest  a  church 
in  questions  of  church  government?  2.  Should  the  pulpit  defend 
any  form  of  church  government  as  by  divine  authority,  to  the 
exclusion  of  others?  3.  The  chief  advantages  and  the  chief 
abuses  of  the  three  great  historic  forms  of  church  polity.  4.  Use 
©f  the  Congregational  polity  to  the  development  of  Christian  char- 
acter. 5.  Ought  women  to  be  recognized  as  part  of  the  ruling 
power  in  the  church  ?  6.  Has  a  pastor  authority,  in  any  sense, 
over  his  church,  and,  if  so,  how  is  it  to  be  exercised?  7.  Ought 
discipline  to  be  executed  against  delinquency  in  Christian  belief  ? 

8.  Does  the  Congregational  polity  at  present  need  development  in 
the  direction  of  authority,  or  in  that  of  liberty?  in  that  of  fel- 
lowship, or  in  that  of  individualism?  9.  A  series  of  plans  of 
sermons  upon  the  offices  which  are  germane  to  a  Congregational 
church. 

XX.  The  twentieth  collection  of  inquiries  relates  to  the  Sun- 
day School.  1.  What  is  its  relation  to  the  church  ?  2.  By  what 
methods  supplementary  to  the  school  can  the  pastor  best  control 
the  biblical  instruction  of  the  young?  3.  Should  catechetical 
Instrwiction  be  given,  and  how  ?    By  the  Westminster  Catechism  I 


HOMILETIC  AND  PASTORAL  STUDIES.  599 

4.  Under  what  conditions,  if  at  all,  may  the  school  be  wisely  made 
a  substitute  for  one  of  the  preaching-services  of  the  Lord's  Day  ? 

5.  How  should  a  pastor  conduct  teachers'  meetings?  6.  Is  it 
expedient  to  select  one  of  the  subjects  of  sermons  on  the  Lord's 
Day  from  the  lesson  of  the  school  ?  7.  What  should  be  the  fre- 
quency and  character  of  sermons  to  children  ?  8.  Should  a 
pastor  encourage  the  employment  of  unconverted  teachers  ?  9. 
Is  the  hymnology  now  current  in  our  Sunday  schools  the  best 
for  the  religious  culture  of  the  young?  Is  there  any  reason  why 
the  hymns  of  the  church  and  the  hymns  of  the  school  should  be 
different?  10.  A  series  of  plans  of  sermons  on  subjects  most 
appropriate  to  thoughtful  children. 

XXI.  A  brief  collection  of  queries  concerns  the  Christian  Work 
of  Laymen,  so  far  as  related  to  the  pulpit.  1.  Under  what  condi- 
tions should  lay-preachers  be  encouraged?  2.  What  services 
should  be  the  exclusive  prerogative  of  clergymen?  3.  Ought 
women  to  be  admitted  to  the  pulpit  as  lay-preachers  ?  4.  What 
attitude  should  the  pulpit  take  toward  young  men's  Christian  asso- 
ciations, and  similar  organizations,  not  ecclesiastical,  for  Christian 
labor?  5.  A  series  of  plans  of  sermons  to  Christians  on  methods 
of  Christian  work. 

XXn.  A  group  of  topics  concerns  the  Lord's  Supper.  1.  Is  it 
wise  to  preface  its  administration  with  a  sermon  ?  2.  Is  it  expe- 
dient to  administer  it  in  silence?  3.  Under  what  circumstances 
may  it  be  administered  privately  ?  4.  Should  its  administration 
to  the  dying  be  encouraged?  5.  Should  the  use  jif  fermented 
wines  be  discouraged  in  its  administration?  6.  What  are  the 
best  subjects  for  sacramental  sermons?  7.  A  series  of  plans  of 
sermons  on  the  Closing  Scenes  in  the  Life  of  Christ. 

XXni.  Another  list  of  topics  concerns  the  ordinance  of  Baptism. 
1.  Is  the  mode  of  baptism  important  enough  to  be  made  the  theme 
of  a  sermon?  2.  Should  the  baptism  of  infants  be  taught  as  a 
duty,  or  as  a  privilege  only?  3.  Should  the  pulpit  give  impor- 
tance to  the  baptism  of  the  dying  who  are  unbaptized  ?  4.  How 
may  the  moral  significance  of  infant  baptism  be  most  effectively 
represented  in  the  pulpit?  5.  How  shall  faith  in  baptismal 
regeneration  be  treated  among  immigrants  from  State  churches  ? 

6.  A  series  of  three  sermons  on  the  moral  significance,  the  propel 
subjects,  and  the  modes,  of  Christian  baptism. 

XXIY     A  consilerable  class  of  topics  must  be  ranked  as  Jilt** 


600  APPENDIX. 

cellanies.  1.  Under  what  conditions  is  it  desirable  to  preach  fa 
neral  sermons  ?  2.  Is  preaching  upon  the  Catechism  a  desirable 
method  of  doctrinal  instruction  ?  3.  Ought  a  preacher  to  preach 
beyond  his  own  experience  of  truth?  4.  Ought  sermons  on  nar 
tional  Fast  Days  to  be.  churchly,  or  secular  ?  5.  Ought  Christmas 
to  be  observed  by  preaching-services  ?  6.  The  uses  and  abuses  of 
fhe  argument  from  analogy  in  preaching.  7.  To  what  extent 
should  the  immediate  wants  of  a  people  govern  the  choice  of  sub- 
jects for  the  pulpit  ?  8.  To  what  extent,  and  by  what  methods, 
may  a  preacher  wisely  labor  for  the  intellectual  culture  of  his  peo- 
ple outside  of  the  work  of  the  pulpit  ?  9.  What  is,  and  what  is 
not,  plagiarism  in  preaching?  10.  To  what  extent  are  biblical 
quotations  desirable  in  sermons  ?  11.  May  theatrical  literature  be 
properly  quoted  in  sermons  ?  12.  The  uses  and  abuses  of  preach- 
ing on  the  prophecies.  13.  The  uses  and  abuses  of  the  parables 
in  preaching.  14.  The  three  modes  of  delivery  in  preaching,  —  by 
reading,  from  memory,  extempore.  15.  How  should  the  biblical 
imprecations  be  treated  in  popular  discourse?  16.  How  should 
the  apparent  barbarism  of  the  divine  government  of  the  Israelites 
De  treated  in  the  pulpit?  17.  How  should  preachers  treat  the 
subject  of  repentance  on  a  death-bed  ?  18.  How  should  the  fu- 
nerals of  those  who  seem  to  have  died  impenitent  be  conducted  ? 

19.  The  compilation  of  a  collection  of  biblical  burial-services. 

20.  How  should  the  day  of  national  thanksgiving  be  observed? 

21.  The  construction  of  forms  of  marriage-service. 

XXV.  I  find  among  my  papers  notes  of  the  following  subjects, 
as  specially  adapted  to  Serial  Preaching.  1.  The  theology  of  Christ. 
2.  The  chief  events  in  Christ's  life.  3.  The  Christology  of  the 
Old  Testament.  4.  Biblical  emblems  of  Christ.  5.  The  Messi- 
anic Psalms.  6.  The  Lord's  Prayer.  7.  The  Beatitudes.  8.  The 
Sermon  on  the  Mount.  9.  Our  Lord's  farewell  prayer  in  the  seven- 
teenth chapter  of  St.  John.  10.  A  selection  of  the  friends  of 
Christ  named  in  his  biographies.  11.  The  parables.  12.  The 
miracles  of  the  New  Testament.  13.  The  miracles  of  the  Old 
Testament.  14.  The  fulfilled  prophecies.  15.  The  destruction  of 
ancient  cities.  16.  The  representative  characters  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament ;  the  same  of  the  New  Testament.  17.  The  canon  of  the 
Scriptures.  18.  The  biblical  descriptions  of  heaven  and  hell.  19. 
The  messages  of  St.  John  to  the  seven  churches  of  Asia.  20.  The 
process  of  conversion,  —  man  as  the  gospel  finds  him,  as  awakened, 


HOMILETIC  AND  PASTORAL  STUDIES.  601 

as  convicted  of  sin,  in  the  act  of  repentance,  evidences  of  conver- 
sion. 21.  The  Ten  Commandments.  22.  The  characteristics  of  the 
four  Gospels.  23.  Religious  awakenings  recorded  in  the  Bible.  24. 
The  relationships  of  the  family.  26.  The  duties  of  Christian 
citizenship.  26.  The  accumulation,  the  uses,  and  the  abuses  of 
property.  27.  The  biblical  view  of  the  position  of  woman  in  the 
divine  organization  of  society.  28.  The  discoveries  of  modem 
astronomy,  of  geology,  of  chemistry,  of  biology  as  illustrative  of 
religious  truth.  29.  The  biblical  bearings  of  recent  explorations 
in  the  East.  30.  The  Pilgrim's  Progress.  31.  Other  religious 
manuals,  like  Doddridge's  "  Rise  and  Progress,"  "  Baxter's  Saints' 
Rest,"  "The  Imitation  of  Christ."  32.  Lectures  on  some  of  the 
hymns  of  the  Church.  33.  Biographical  lectures  on  some  of  the 
martyrs,  on  some  of  the  reformers.  34.  The  history  of  the  Eng- 
lish Bible.  35.  The  exodus  of  the  Pilgrims  from  Great  Britain. 
36.  The  several  acts  of  public  worship.  37.  The  biblical  doctrine 
of  the  millennium.  38.  To  young  men,  on  the  morals  of  the 
several  professions.  39.  The  Christian  theory  of  the  relations  of 
capital  and  labor.  40.  The  several  ftges  of  humAn  life.  4i .  Th* 
uonl  ufies  of  the  aeaaoiui. 


INDEX. 


Ab^iiptness  in  Introdu.'^fcion,  246. 

Absirnseness  in  introduction,  237. 

Abuses  of  divisions,  382. 

Accommodated  texts,  114  ;  cautions 
in  use  of,  123. 

Adams,  Rev.  Dr.  N.,  342. 

Adams,  J.  Q.,425. 

Adequacy  of  proposition,  326. 

Affectation  of  independence  in  ex- 
position, 194. 

Affectionate  titles  in  appeal,  573. 

Affirmative  propositions,  331. 

Aids  to  exjiosition,  191;  to  inven- 
tion, 428. 

Alexander,  Rev.  Dr.  A.,  2,  321. 

Alexander,  Rev.  Dr.  J.,  14,  321,  375, 
387,  458,  484. 

Alison,  Sir  ArcMbald,  167,  353. 

American  pulpit  of  the  Revolution, 
8 ;  usage  regarding  place  of  text, 
134. 

Amherst  College,  revival  in,  654. 

Analysis  of  sermon,  37. 

Analytic  preaching,  286,  288;  fail- 
ures of,  291. 

Ancient  orators,  personality  of,  225. 

Andrews,  Bishop  L.,  198. 

Angela,  Michael,  319. 

Angelology  of  Scriptures,  594. 

Announcement  of  text,  136;  of  divis- 
ions, 421. 

Antoninus,  M.  Aurelius,  73. 

Apostolic  usage  of  text,  45;  policy 
in  revivals,  556. 

Apostrophe  in  introduction,  262. 

Appeals,  537;  in  introduction,  238; 
to  feeling,  concealment  of,  297. 

Application,  characteristic  of  con- 
clusion, 454. 

Applicatory  introduction,  267. 

Arbitrary  number  of  divisions,  382, 

Argument  in  introduction,  238; 
weight  of,  iu  order  of  divisions, 
418. 

Arffumentative  sermons,  35. 


Aristotle,  analysis  of  disconrse,  38 

Arnold,  Matthew,  464. 

Arnold,  Rev.  Dr.  Thomas,  170,  177 
190,  248,  460. 

Arrogance  in  introductions,  256,  297, 

Artistic  appeal,  567. 

Atonement,  governmental  theory  of, 
328;  topics  concerning,  592. 

Attention,  stimulation  of,  an  object 
of  introductions,  228. 

Audience,  sermons  classified  by,  29; 
character  of,  regulative  of  divis- 
ion, 380;  of  development,  432. 

Augustine,  160. 

Authority,  use  of,  in  introductions, 
234;  professional  obtrusion  of,  254. 

Bacon,  Lord,  387. 

Bacon,  Roger,  47. 

Ballads,  popular,  22. 

Baptism,  topics  concerning,  699. 

Barnes,  Rev.  Albert,  114,  116,  14* 

207,  253,  305,  317,  410,  423,  448. 
Barrow,  Rev.  Dr.  Isaac,  241,  331. 
Baxter,  Rev.  Dr.  Richard,  325,  570. 
Beecher,  Rev.  Dr.  Lyman,  289,  376, 

533. 
Belligerence  in  introductions,  233. 
Benediction,  substitute  for  applica- 
tion, 500;  true  office  of,  502. 
Bible  service,   205;    substitute   for 

afternoon  service,  214. 
Biblical  element  in  the  sermon,  9 ; 

science,  rapid  advance  of,    IW; 

origin  of  figurative  propositions, 

342, 
Biographical  literature  of  texts,  a 

source  of  exposition,  144. 
Blair,  Rev.  Dr.  Hugh,  117,  269. 
Bourdalove,  238,  303. 
Brevity,  promoted  by  divisions,  372; 

false  promises  of,  424;  in  intrtv 

duction,  245,248;  in  propositions. 

349;  in  recapitulation,  520. 
Brougham,  Lord,  165,  496,  62S. 


604 


INDEX. 


Burke,  Edmund,  225,  293,  496. 
Bushnell,  Rev.  Dr.  Horace,  61, 100, 
143, 294,  331,  347. 

Calvinistic  exegesis,  176;  ideal  of 
preacher,  576. 

Campbell,  Rev.  Dr.  George,  classifi- 
cation of  sermons  by,  30. 

Caricature  needed  in  discussion,  41. 

Carlyle,  Thomas,  369. 

Cause  and  effect,  in  order  of  divis- 
ions, 416. 

Chalmers,  Rev.  Dr.  Thomas,  153, 315, 
459. 

Channing,  Rev.  Dr.  William  E.,  465. 

Chantry,  375. 

Characteristic  applications,  528. 

Characteristics  of  introduction,  237; 
of  development,  436. 

Chamock,  Rev.  Dr.  Stephen,  325, 
326,  383. 

Choate,  Rufus,  337. 

Christian  origin  of  preaching,  10. 

Chrysostom,  96,  230. 

Cicero,  224,  240. 

Circuitous  construction  in  proposi- 
tions, 351. 

Classic  English  in  propositions,  361. 

Classification  of  sermons,  28. 

Clearness  in  exposition,  172. 

Climax  in  divisions,  416;  in  devel- 
opment, 451;  in  recapitulation, 
522. 

Coleridge,  S.  T.,  208,  374. 

Commendatory  introduction,  270. 

Commentary  compared  with  expla- 
nation, 139. 

Commonplace  in  divisions,  411. 

Common  sense  in  exegesis,  149. 

Compact  applications,  505. 

Completeness  in  text,  112;  in  intro- 
duction, 251;  in  proposition,  359; 
in  development,  444. 

Complex  propositions,  331. 

Composition  of  introduction,  274. 

Comprehensive  themes,  317. 

Comprehensiveness  promoted  by  di- 
visions, 367. 

Concealment  of  aim  of  sermon,  296; 
of  conclusion  in  divisions,  412. 

Concentration  in  inference  and  re- 
mark, 533. 

Conciseness  in  explanation,  184;  pro- 
moted by  divisions,  371 ;  in  devel- 
opment, 446. 

Conclusion,  454;  suggested  by  ex- 
planation, 202. 

Condensation  in  development,  447. 

Confidence  in  appeals,  565. 

Confl,icting  exegeses,  179. 

Cot^fusion  in  divisions,  409. 


Congruity  of  text  and  theme,  107 
of  text  with  rhetorical  structure 
110;  of  text  with  associations.  111, 
in  introduction,  247;  of  proposi- 
tion with  text,  308;  in  announce- 
ment of  divisions,  422;  of  conclu- 
sion with  discussion,  518. 

Connection,  clearness  of,  in  devel- 
opment, 444. 

Connective  introduction,  272. 

Conscience,  appeals  to,  540. 

Consecration,  want  of,  in  preacher. 
457. 

Context,  a  source  of  exposition,  143. 

Continuity  in  development,  451. 

Continuous  applications,  505,  512. 

Contrast  in  conclusion,  530. 

Convergent  conclusions,  532. 

Courage  in  simplicity  of  exposition 
192. 

Cowper,  "William,  319. 

Creation,  topics  concerning,  691. 

Cross-divisions,  396. 

Culture,  ministerial,  576. 

Cumulative  remarks  in  introduc 
tion,  271. 

Curiosity  of  audience,  assumed  ii 
introduction,  229. 

Davies,  President  Samuel,  120,  673. 

Declarative  propositions,  331. 

Decline  of  exposition  in  pulpit,  208. 

Delivery,  sermons  classified  by,  28. 

Demosthenes,  446. 

De  Quincey,  Thomas,  151,  383,  389, 
417,  423. 

Description  in  introduction,  259. 

Development,  426. 

Devotional  element  In  preaching, 
459. 

De  Wette  71. 

Dickens,  Charles,  40,  386. 

Didactic  unity  of  proposition,  303. 

Dignity,  in  texts,  95;  in  explana« 
tion,  188;  diminutive  themes  hos- 
tile to,  320;  of  propositions  suS' 
tained  by  divisions,  391. 

Digression,  intentional,  439. 

Diminutive  themes,  318. 

Directness  in  introduction,  243. 

Disadvantages  of  preaching,  228. 232. 

Disclosure  of  conclusion  in  dim- 
ions,  423. 

Discussion,  character  of,  regnlativf 
of  division,  380. 

Distinction  in  divisions,  388. 

Divergent  conclusions,  532, 

Diversity,  in  introductions,  242 ;  in 
propositions,  302 ;  in  divisions, 
400,  414. 

Divine  sanction  of  preaching,  492. 


INDEX. 


605 


Divisions,  in  introduction,  ancient 
olassification  of,  242 ;  stated  in 
proposition,  356  ;  needlessly  pre- 
announced,  422. 

Doctrinal  preaching  aided  by  re- 
striction of  subject,  312. 

Doddridge,  Rev.  Dr.  Philip,  7,  522. 

Dogmatism  in  exegesis,  177. 

Double  introductions,  243. 

"Double  sense  "  in  exposition,  181. 

Double  service  of  Sabbath,  209;  modi- 
fication of,  213. 

Drama,  compared  with  sermon,  25. 

Dryden,  John,  328. 

Dual  texts,  82;  divisions,  401. 

Dwight,  Rev.  Dr.  Timothy,  454. 

Earnestness  in  appeal,  564. 

Edwards,  Professor  B.  B.,  127. 

Edwards,  Rev.  President,  285,  360, 
444,  535,  560,  587. 

Egotism  in  introduction,  255. 

Elaboration  in  sermon,  14;  obvious, 
in  introduction,  241;  demands 
compact  application,  505. 

Elegance  in  propositions,  361;  pro- 
moted by  divisions,  372. 

Elements,  radical,  of  conclusion,  515. 

Elimination  in  texts,  113. 

Elocution  in  appeal,  566. 

Eloquence,  Daniel  Webster's  defini- 
tion of,  24. 

Emergency  of  preaching,  491. 

Emerson,  R.  W.,  412. 

Emmons,  Rev.  Dr.  Nathaniel,  88, 
112,  296,  331,  360,  454,  517,  582. 

Emotion,  religious  thought  confused 
by,  285. 

Emotional  element  in  texts,  92. 

English  pulpit,  study  of,  191 ;  over- 
estimate of  intellect  in,  469. 

Enthusiasm  in  introduction,  279. 

Episcopacy,  claim  of,  to  culture,  578. 

Epithets  in  propositions,  350. 

Epitome  of  discussion  in  introduc- 
tion, 272. 

Evangelical  theory  of  preaching,  in 
applications  490. 

Evangelism,  perils  of,  287. 

Evasion  in  exposition,  187. 

Everett,  Edward,  224,  506. 

Exaggeration  in  explanation,  167. 

Exclamation  in  appeals,  539. 

Execution  the  object  of  appeal,  540. 

Exhaustion  of  subject,  a  reason  for 
restriction  of  theme,  325;  of  prop- 
osition in  divisions,  389. 

Expectant  appeal,  565. 

Expectation  fostered  by  divisions, 
ill. 


Expedients  of  secular  eloquence,  54. 

Explanation,  138;  equivalent  of  in- 
troduction, 223;  and  introduction 
intermingled,  224. 

Explanatory  sermons,  34;  introduo 
tion,  268. 

Exposition  distinct  from  explana- 
tion, 139;  history  of,  in  New  Eng- 
land, 206. 

Expository  sermons,  32;  introduo 
tion,  267. 

Facility  of  appeal,  667. 
Fanaticism,  fear  of,  472. 
Fanciful  interpretations,  188. 
Fantastic  api)lications,  536. 
Feeling  in  introduction,  238;  the  ol> 

ject  of  appeal,  538. 
F^nelon,  301. 
Fichte,  378. 
Figurative  statements   in  propoal- 

tions,  341. 
Finney,  Rev.  Dr.  Charles,  373,  447, 

454,  551. 
Flavel,  535. 
Force  in  development,  445;  demands 

compact  application,  507  ;  in  in- 
ference or  remark,  526. 
Forewarning  of  appeals,  573. 
Formality  in  inference  and  remark^ 

534. 
Forms  of  texts,  77;  of  propositions, 

330  ;  of  divisions,  406. 
Foster,  John,  259,  488,  608. 
Fragmentary  texts,  77. 
Fruitfulness  of  theme,  a  reason  for 

restriction,  324. 

Garrison,  W.  L.,  50,  62,  233. 

Genuineness  in  appeal,  567. 

Geometrical  spirit,  376. 

German  usage  regarding  place  oi 
text,  134;  pulpit,  394,  510. 

Gibbon,  Edward,  11, 

Gill,  Rev.  Dr.  John,  188. 

God,  idea  of,  in  conversion,  548;  be- 
ing of,  topics  concerning,  589;  at- 
tributes of,  topics  concerning,  590. 

Goethe,  his  definition  of  poetry,  24. 

Good-will  of  audience  toward ■ 
preacher,  224;  towards  sermon, 
232. 

Grammatical  construction  of  texta, 
77. 

Grattan,  Henry,  253. 

Great  themes,  320;  sermons,  393. 

Griffln,  Rev.  Dr.  E.  D.,  315. 

Guizot,  5,  280. 

Guthrie,  Rev.  Dr.  Thcmas,  601 

Hack'^e.yed  application,  499, 


606 


INDEX. 


HalU  Robert,  258,  375,  564. 
Harms,  Glaus,  50,  77. 
Hearing,  instinct  of,  demands  state- 
ment of  proposition,  283. 
Heaven,  topics  concerning,  594. 
Heber,  Bishop  Reginald,  171. 
Hebraisms  of  New  Testament,  148. 
Henry,  Patrick,  560. 
Herbert,  George,  99. 
Mermeneutic  inaccuracy,  dangers  of, 

162. 
Heterogeneous  discourse  restrained 

by  unity  of  proposition,  307. 
Hill,  Rev.  Rowland,  441. 
Historical   literature   of    texts,    a 

source  of  exposition,  144. 
History   of    custom   of   employing 

texts,  44. 
Hitchcock,   Profes&Dr  Edward,   82, 

120. 
Holmes,  O.  W.,  248. 
Holy  Spirit,  work  of,  in  revivals, 

552. 
Homiletics,  defined,    1 ;    study   of, 

under-valued,   41 ;   unreasonable 

expectations  of,  42. 
Horsley,  Bishop,  88. 
Hortation  in  introduction,  262. 
Hostility  overcome  in  introduction, 

235. 
Human  element  in  appeal,  568. 
Hume,  David,  286. 
Humility,  affectation  of,  257. 
Humor,  in  exposition,  198. 
Humphrey,  President  Heman,  554. 
Huntington,  Bishop  F.  D.,  83,  115. 
Hymnology ,  popular,  criticised,  23. 

Identity  of  proposition  with  body  of 
sermon,  309;  of  theme  with  dis- 
cussion, 327. 

Ignorance  in  exegesis,  169. 

illustration,  need  of,  in  discussion, 
40  ;  excessive,  440.^  h  C  "/) 

Illustrative  sermons,  M:;  introduc- 
tion, 269. 

[mxiginative  religion,  557;  fervor  in 
appeal,  569. 

Imitation  of  spirituality  impossible, 
467. 

Impracticable  theology,  483. 

Imprescion  of  text  upon  audience, 
83. 

Incompleteness  in  texts,  112. 

Indefinite  theory  of  inspiration,  200; 
form  in  divisions,  413. 

Indolence,  in  exposition,  185;  in  in- 
troduction, 247. 

Inference  and  remark,  value  of,  515, 
523;  derived  from  inference,  530. 

inferential  sermons,  32. 


Inspi'^atiQn,  theory  of,  in  expo8i< 
tion,  200;  topics  concerning,  590. 

Inspired  authority  in  texts,  51. 

Intellectual  element  overestimated, 
469. 

Intensity  of  inspired  thought,  64;  in 
proposition,  354;  in  appeal,  537. 

Intensive  introduction,  268. 

Inter changeableness  of  propositiona, 
332. 

Interest  of  exposition,  190;  promoti« 
ed  by  diAdsions,  373;  order  of ,  in 
divisions,  419;  in  inference  and 
remark,  535. 

Interpolations  as  texts,  68. 

Interrogative  propositions,  331;  di- 
visions, 413. 

Introduction,  220;  aided  by  texts, 
60. 

Invention  of  materials,  420. 

Investigation  not  explanation,  138. 

Irrelevance  of  exposition,  179. 

Jay,  Rev.  Dr.  William,  120, 153, 347, 

382,  408,  441,  484,  495,  572. 
Jewish  origin  of  the  text,  44. 
Johnson,  Dr.  Samuel,  229. 
Joubert,  345. 

ifitVA:.  Rev.  Dr.  E.  N.,513. 

Lamb,  Charles,  363. 

Lathrop,  Rev.  Dr.  Joseph,  103,349. 

Latimer,  Bishop,  124,  669. 

Latitude  of  subject,  309. 

Laymen,  u?,eoi  biblical  figures,  344, 
work  of,  211,  579,  583;  topics  con- 
cerning, 599. 

Legitimacy  of  sequence  in  inference 
or  remark,  524. 

Length  of  texts,  79;  of  appeals,  571. 

Lincoln,  President,  152. 

Locality  of  explanation,  203. 

Logical  adjustment  in  explanation, 
141;  unity  of  proposition,  302; 
propositions,  330,  358;  necessity 
in  order  of  divisions,  415 ;  demand 
for  compact  application,  505;  in- 
tegrity in  preacher,  525. 

Longfellow,  Professor  H.  "W.,  117. 

io7-d'sSupper,topicsconcermng,599. 

Lowth,  Bishop,  357,  674. 

Ludicrous  associations  in  texts,  97. 

Luther,  Martin,  297. 

Lyceum,  and  pulpit  compared,  228. 

Macaulay,  Lord,  537,  545, 563. 
Man,  natural  character  of,  topici 

concerning,  591. 
Manliness  in  use  of  mottoes.  133. 
Mannerism  in  pro]X)sitions,  353. 


INDEX. 


607 


Mansfield,  Lord,  293. 

Marshall,  Chief  Justice,  187,  293. 

Mason,  Rev.  Dr.  J.  M.,  488. 

Massillon,  119,  303. 

Mastery  of  subject  in  divisions,  392. 

Materials  of  the  explanation,  142; 

of  divisions,  386. 
Melanchthon,  46. 
Melodrama  in  emotion,  541. 
Memorizing  of  recapitulation,  622. 
Mental  faculties,  sermons  classified 

by,  30;  state  of  audience,  relation 

of,  to  introduction,  220. 
Merrill,  Rev.  Mr.,  272. 
Metaphorical  resemblance  in  accom- 
modation, 116. 
Method  of  development,  430. 
Methodist   Church,   tendencies   in, 

580. 
Milton,  John,  21,  447. 
Minute  divisions,  378. 
Minuteness  of  criticism,  need  of,  39. 
Miracles,  topics  concerning,  595. 
Miscellaneous  inquiries  concerning 

texts,  134;  topics  of  discussion,599. 
Misinterpretations  of  texts,  159. 
Missionary  spirit  in  preaching,  587. 
Missions,  topics  concerning,  596. 
Mistranslations  as  texts,  68. 
Moderation  in  introductions,  235. 
Modern  use  of  the  text,  48. 
Modesty  in  choice  of  texts,  105;  in 

introduction,  253;  excess  of,  257. 
Mohammedan  oratory,  11. 
Montaigne,  419.' 
Moody,  "  Parson,"  346. 
Moral  state  of  preacher,  relation  of, 

to  introduction,  223. 
Morbidness  in  revivals,  555. 
Motto-texts,  126. 
Mutilation  of  texts,  96. 
Multiplication  of  divisions,  383. 

Napoleon  Bonaparte,  246,  307. 

Narration  in  introduction,  259. 

Narrative  introduction,  269. 

Naturalness  in  introduction,  231 ;  of 
conversion,  493. 

Natural  Science,  a  source  of  expo- 
sition, 153. 

Neal,  Daniel,  416. 

Necessitarian  theology,  476. 

Necessity  of  proposition,  282;  excej)- 
tions  to,  295;  of  divisions,  365. 

Needless  exposition,  185,  188;  divis- 
ions, 386. 

Negative  propositions,  331;  divis- 
ions, 413. 

Nettleton,  Rev.  Dr.  Asahel,  239, 316. 

Newton,  John,  152,  484. 

New  Version,  Lord's  Prayer  69. 


Notoriety,  clerical,  104. 

Novelty  in  texts,  98. 

Numbers,  curiosity  about,  in  reTiT« 

als,  551. 
Numerical  forms  of  divisions,  421. 

Objections  to  the  text,  49;  to  divi» 
ions,  365. 

Objects  of  explanation,  140. 

Obscure  texts,  87. 

Obscurity  in  exposition,  172. 

Occasions,  sermons  classified  by,  28; 
decisive  of  development,  433. 

Omission  of  applications,  497. 

Oneness  of  impression  in  introduce 
tion,  242. 

OraZ  element  in  sermon,  1;  address 
demands  proposition,  284. 

Oratorical  instinct  demands  prepo- 
sition, 283. 

Oratory,  use  of  definite  statements 
in,  292. 

Order  of  announcement  of  text, 
136;  of  divisions,  415;  in  develop- 
ment, 450. 

Origin  of  preaching,  10. 

Originality  in  introduction,  259;  aid- 
ed by  restriction  of  subject,  310. 

Over-education  of  clergy,  581. 

Over-wrought  introductions,  261. 

Owen,  Rev.  Dr.  John,  325. 

Paradox  in  propositions,  347. 

Parallel  passages  in  exposition,  146; 
in  divisions,  387.  » 

Parables,  abuse  of,  in  exegesis,  170. 

Park,  Professor  E.  A.,  127,  305. 

Parker,  Theodore,  9,  232. 

Parr,  Rev.  Dr.  Samuel,  257. 

Pascal,  376. 

Passionate  appeals,  560. 

Pastoral  work  in  English  Church, 
471. 

Payson,  Rev.  Dr.  Edward,  349,  572, 

Permanence  of  impression,  promot- 
ed by  divisions,  375. 

Person,  power  of,  224. 

Personal  introductions,  226;  experi- 
ence, use  of,  277 ;  tastes,  in  devel- 
opment, 433. 

Personality  in  texts,  102;  in  intr©« 
ductions,  253. 

Perspicuity,  promoted  by  divisiont, 
365:  in  recapitulation,  521. 

Perspicuous  texts,  84. 

Persuasion,  an  element  in  sermon, 
21. 

Persuasive  sermons,  35. 

Pertinency  of  texts,  107;  in  motto 
texts,  132;  in  development,  441. 

Phelps,  Rev.  Dr.  E.,  206. 


608 


INDEX. 


Philosophical  technicalities  in  prop- 
ositiona,  336. 

Picturesque  exposition,  165,  190 ; 
unity  of  proposition,  304. 

Pius  VL,  118. 

Place  of  text  in  sermon,  134. 

PlatOy  377. 

Plural  propositions,  331. 

Poetry  distinct  from  preaching,  21. 

Political  science  in  exegesis,  150; 
abuse  of  exegesis,  169. 

Polity  of  church,  topics  concerning, 
698. 

fopular  element  in  preaching,  2 ;  in- 
telligence promoted  by  texts,  55; 
logic  in  exegesis,  158;  respect  for 
authority  in  exposition,  195 ;  con- 
fusion of  subjects  of  pulpit,  284. 

Positiveness  in  exposition,  174. 

Poverty  ot  materials  in  divisions,  393. 

Practical  nature  of  preaching,  492  ; 
duties,  a  test  in  revivals,  553. 

Practice,  dexterity  of,  in  develop- 
ment, 435. 

Prayer,  in  introduction,  271;  sub- 
stitute for  appeal,  498;  topics  con- 
cerning, 595. 

Preface,  in  announcement  of  text, 
136;  of  proposition,  362. 

Preliminaries  and  introduction  dis- 
tinguished, 220;  of  repentance, 
exhortation  to,  542. 

Preludes  on  current  events,  262. 

Premature  discussion,  392;  applica- 
tion, 402. 

Prerequisites  of  development,  427. 

Prior,  Sir  James,  385. 

Progrress,  in  introduction,  245;  pro- 
moted by  divisions,  370;  in  con- 
clusion, 520. 

Promising  texts,  92, 198. 

Prophecy,  abuse  of,  in  exegesis,  170. 

Proportion,  aided  by  classification 
of  sermons,  36;  in  development, 
433,  452;  topics  ooncerning,  597. 

Proposition,  282;  suggested  by  ex- 
planation, 201. 

Proverbs,  as  propositions,  346. 

Psychological,  order  in  divisions,  417. 

Psychology,  in  exegesis,  149;  and 
homiletics,  575. 

Pulpit,  leadership  of,  in  exposition, 
210. 

Punishment,  eternal,  plan  of  ser- 
mon upon,  298. 

l^uritan  preaching,  12,  443. 

Purity  of  construction  in  proposi- 
tions, 361. 

ii;uaXifications  of  truth,  in  develop- 
ment, 445. 


Qualities  of  explanation,  158. 

Quintilian,  38. 

Quotations  from  original  text,  194, 
in  introduction,  271. 

Raciness  Oi  figurative  propositions, 
345. 

Rapidity  of  approach  in  tntrodaO' 
tion,  245. 

Reading,  suggestive,  429. 

Recapitulation,  520. 

Recklessness  of  uneducated  clergy^ 
157. 

Redundancy  in  texts,  112. 

Reforms,  social  and  political,  topics 
concerning,  596. 

Regeneration,  topics  concerning,  592 

Reinhard,  Rev.  Dr.  F.  V.,  311. 

Relevance  of  divisions  to  proposi- 
tion, 387. 

Religiosity  of  temperament,  657. 

Religious  truth  essential  to  sermon, 
9. 

Remark  and  inference,  523. 

Remembrance  of  truth  facilitated 
by  texts,  58. 

Remoteness  of  beginning,  in  intro 
duction,  244. 

Reptetition,  in  propositions,  352;  in 
conclusion,  404. 

Repulsion  from  truth  by  pulpit 
methods,  508. 

Resemblance  of  form  in  divisions, 
408. 

Reserve  of  force  in  development, 
452. 

Restriction  of  proposition,  309;  inde- 
cisive reasons  for,  324;  of  recapit- 
ulation, 521. 

Resurrection,  topics  concerning,  593. 

Retrenchment  in  development,  447. 

Retribution,  doctrine  of,  in  preach- 
ing, 461 ;  topics  concerning,  593. 

Revivals,  spirit  of,  287;  topics  con- 
cerning, 597. 

Rhetorical  amplification  in  explana- 
tion, 142;  painting,  excess  of,  107; 
congruity  between  explanation 
and  text,  196;  quality  of  intro- 
duction, 221,  249;  propositions, 
330;  variety  in  appeals,  572. 

Robertson,  F.  W.,  140,  567 

Romeyn,  Rev.  Dr.,  359. 

Romish  corruption  of  the  text,  46. 

Ross,  Rev.  Dr.,  201. 

Rudeness  in  appeal,  569. 

Sabbath  school,  substituted  for  af te^ 
noon  service,  213;  topics  conceni< 
ing,  598. 

Sabbath  service,  history  of,  205. 


INDEX 


609 


8ac€TdoUd  theorr   of  benediction, 

602. 
** Sacred"    Bombers   in    divisions, 

382. 
Sameness  in  preaching,  285. 
Saturday  Review,  16. 
Saurin,  109. 

Scholasticism  in  exposition,  193. 
Science  versus  exegesis,  154. 
Scientific  teclinicalities  in  prei>08i- 

tions,  335. 
Schott,  Rev.  Dr.  H.  A.,  classification 

of  sermons,  29. 
Scott,  SirW,,  251,370;  Taylor's  crit- 
icism of,  193. 
Scriptural  appeals,  558. 
Seclusion  of  clergy,  686. 
Selection  of  texts,  67;  of  elements 

in  conclusion,  518. 
Self-committal  in  revivals,  C42,  a-ib- 

stitute?  ior,  517. 
Self-posse ssion  in  appeal,  56J. 
Sensibility,  economy  of,  611. 
Separation   of   clergy  and  people, 

577. 

Serial  preaching,  subjects  for,  600. 

Sermon,  generic  idea  of,  1. 

Shakespeare,  B22,  564;  individuality 

of  characters,  280;  Julius  Caesar, 
090 

Shedd,  Professor  W.  G.  T.,  83. 
Shepherd,  Professor  George,  361. 
Short  texts,  80. 
Significance  of   text,  a  quality  of 

explanation,  165. 
Simeon,  342,  347,  349,  360,  360,  361. 
Simple  propositions,  331. 
Simplicity,  in  introduction,  237;  in 

proposition,  335. 
Sin,  influence  of,  upon  style,  74. 
Sismondi,  49,  58. 
Skeptical  mannerism   in  exegesis, 

176. 
Skepticism,  relation  of  preaching  to, 

448. 
Skinner,  Rev.  Dr.  Thomas  H.,  624. 
Slavery,  biblical  argument  for,  161. 
Smith,  Rev.  John  Pye,  153. 
Solitude  of  soul  in  conversion,  549. 
Song  of  Solomon,  texts  from,  98. 
Sound,    basis    of    accommodation, 

116. 
Sources  of  texts,  67. 
South,  Rev.  Dr.  Robert,  94,  96,  101, 

108, 113,  117,  306,  311,  474. 
Specific  objects  of  introduction,  224. 
Specificness,  in  propositions,  358;  in 

appeals,  657. 
Spontaneous  preaching,  15. 
Stagl,  Madame  de,  2h 
Stage,  compared  witk  pulpit,  25. 


Stale  truths  freshened  by  restriction 

of  subject,  311. 
Statement  of  proposition,  282. 
Stillman,  Rev.  Dr.  Samuel,  260. 
Stuart,  Professor  M.,  171. 
Studies,  Lomiletic  and  pastoral,  589 
Study  of  texts,  value  of,  66;  of  Scrip. 

tures,  218. 
Subdivisions,  384. 
S^ibjects,  sermons  classified  by,  29; 

regulative  of  number  of  divisiona, 

377;  of  de-olopment,  431. 
Suostance  01  proposition,  300. 
Sx:p,rr>/acy  of  gospel  for  salvation 

i90. 
Suggestiveness,  in  introduction,  250, 

258;  of  proposition  in  divisions, 

405,  407. 
Swift,  Dean,  450. 
Symmetry  violated  by  diminutive 

themes,  322. 
Sympathetic  excitement  in  revlTaLi, 

645. 
Sympathy  in  appeal,  566. 
Synonyms  in  propositions,  349, 

Tact  in  introduction,  260. 

Taylor,  Jeremy,  192,  303,  304. 

7'aylor,  William,  193. 

Text,  sermons  classified  by,  30;  a 
source  of  exposition,  143. 

Textual  sermons,  32 ;  preaching, 
abuse  of,  107;  dependent  on  di- 
visions, 368. 

Theatric  sermons,  26. 

Theological  abuse  of  exegesis,  168; 
faith  formed  by  analytic  preach- 
ing, 289;  technicalities  in  propo- 
sitions, 337. 

Theology  unfriendly  to  applicatory 
preaching,  476. 

Theremin,  267. 

Th-oluck,  Professor,  409,  510. 

Threefold  division,  382. 

Time,  regulative  of  extent  of  di- 
vision, 381;  order  of,  in  division, 
418. 

Titles  versus  propositions,  342. 

Topical  sermons,  31;  origin  of,  47. 

Traditional  misinterpretations,  161. 

Treatment  of  subject,  sermons  cla* 
sified  by,  33. 

Trinity,  topics  concerning,  690. 

Truthfulness  of  exegesis,  168. 

Tyler,  Rev.  Dr.  Bennett,  140. 

Uniformity  in  number  of  divisions, 
383. 

Uninspired  sentiments  as  texts,  72. 

Unity,  aided  by  classification  of  ser- 
mons, 36;  by  texts,  63;  of  text 


610 


INDEX. 


and  explanation,  178;  in  explana- 
tion, 178;  in  introduction,  242;  of 
impression  demands  proposition, 
284 ;  of  discourse  based  upon  unity 
of  proposition,  300;  of  proposition, 
300;  aided  by  divisions,  369;  in 
divisions,  398:  in  development, 
436. 

Usage  of  pulpit  in  exegesis  unrelia- 
ble, 160. 

Usefulness,  measure  of  caltore,  585. 

Uses  of  texts.  51. 

Variety,  promoted  by  texts,  61 ;  by 
novel  texts,  99;  in  explanation, 
203;  in  introduction,  266;  in  pref- 
ace of  proposition,  362;  in  conclu- 
sion, 520;  in  recapitulation,  522; 
of  sources  of  application,  628. 

Verbal  criticism  in  explanatioB, 
140. 

VertcUilitjf  In  «ppeftk»  671. 


Vinet,  Rev.  Dr.  A.  R.,  10,  49, 51, 61, 

238,  267,  274,  301. 
Violent  appeal,  560. 
Vital  acts,  object  of  appeal,  642. 
Voltaire,  49,  51. 

"Watchman,  what  of  the  night?" 

125. 
Weakness,  in  conclusion,  causes  of, 

457;  in  appeal,  560. 
Webster,  D.,  3,  24,  55,  251,  280,  293, 

444,  562. 
Webster,  Professor,  defense  of,  417. 
Weeping,  in  audience,  overrated,  15; 

in  appeal,  561. 
Whately,  Archbishop  Thomas,  161, 

241. 
Whitefield,  George,  61,  236,  262,  2»i, 

Ml,  361. 
Wiggan,  Hennr,  562. 
Wilson,  Rev.  J.,  601. 
Wordno^rth,  Williaaa,  537. 


PROFESSOR   AUSTIN    PHELPS' 

ESSAYS  AND  STUDIES. 


MY     NOTE-BOOK:     Fragmentary    Studies   in 
Theology    and    Subjects    Adjacent    Thereto. 

I  vol.,  i2mo,  with  a  Portrait,  $1.50. 
Contents:  Fragmentary  Studies  in  Theology.— The  Personality 
of  a  Preacher. — The  Materials  of  Sermons. — Methods  and  Adjuncts  of 
the  Pulpit.— Conscience  and  Its  Allies.— Our  Sacred  Books.— Theistic 
and  Christian  Types  of  Religious  Life.— The  Future  of  Christianity.— 
Methodism  :  Its  Work  and  Ways. — Miscellaneous  Topics. 

A  peculiar  interest  attaches  to  these  studies  in  the  fact 
that  almost  the  last  act  of  Dr.  Phelps'  life  was  in  connection 
with  his  preparations  for  their  publication.  In  the  Preface 
to  the  volume  he  says  :  "  By  far  the  major  part  of  every 
man's  thinking  is  fragmentary.  The  best  thinking  of  some 
men  is  so.  They  are  seers  of  transient  and  disconnected 
vision.  An  educated  man  who  practices  literary  frugality 
in  preserving  the  ideas  suggested  by  his  reading,  will  find 
after  years  of  professional  service  an  accumulation  of  them, 
in  which  he  will  recognize  some  of  the  most  robust  products 

of  his  brain These  remarks  are  suggested  by 

the   origin   and   resources   of   the   present  volunie.     It   is 
literally  what  its  title  indicates." 

MV    STUDY    AND    OTHER    ESSAYS,     i  v^l, 

i2mo,  $1.50. 

Contents  :  My  Study. — Vibratory  Progress  in  Religious  Beliefs. — 
Oscillations  of  Faith  in  Future  Retribution. — Retribution  in  Its  Biblical 
Atmosphere. — St.  Paul  on  Retribution. — Correctives  of  Popular  Faith  in 
Retribution. — Retribution  in  the  Light  of  Reason. — Endless  Sin  Under 


Professor  Phelps'  Books, 


the  Gk)veminent  of  God. — The  Hypothesis  of  a  Second  Probation. — 
Scholastic  Theories  of  Inspiration.— The  New  England  Clergy  and  the 
Anti-Slavery  Reform.— Massachusetts  and  the  Quakers.— Does  the 
World  Move  ?— Is  the  Christian  Life  Worth  Living  ?— A  Study  of  the 
Episcopal  Church.— Prayer  as  a  State  of  Christian  Living.— Why  Do  I 
Believe  Christianity  To  Be  a  Revelation  from  God  ? 

*'  Whatever  Phelps  writes  is  worth  reading  and  preserving.  Each  of  the  essays  ol 
this  volume  bears  the  unmistakable  mark  of  his  thought  and  style.  Nearly  every 
paragraph  betrays  the  touch  of  a  master.  In  vigor,  in  richness  of  thought,  as  well  as 
in  neatness  and  clearness  of  style,  these  essays  are  almost  incomparable." 

—  The  Lutheran  Observer, 


MY    PORTFOLIO:    A    Collection    of   Essays. 

I  vol.,  i2mo,  $1.50. 

Contents  :  A  Pastor  of  the  Last  Generation. — The  Rights  of 
Believers  in  Ancient  Creeds.— The  Biblical  Doctrine  of  Retribution. — 
The  Puritan  Theory  of  Amusements. — The  Christian  Theory  of  Amuse- 
ments.—Is  Card-Playing  a  Christian  Amusement  ? — The  Question  of 
Sunday  Cars. — Woman-Suffrage  as  Judged  by  the  Working  of  Negro- 
Suffrage.— Reform  in  the  Political  Status  of  Women. — The  Length  of 
Sermons.— The  Calvinistic  Theory  of  Preaching.— The  Theology  of  "The 
Marble  Faun."— The  Debt  of  the  Nation  to  New  England.— Ought  the 
Pulpit  to  Ignore  Spiritualism? — How  Shall  the  Pulpit  Treat  Spiritual- 
ism ? — Foreign  and  Home  Missions  as  Seen  by  Candidates  for  the 
Ministry.— Foreign  Missions,  Their  Range  of  Appeal  for  Missionaries 
Limited. — CongregationaUsts  and  Presbyterians  :  A  Plea  for  Union. — 
Methods  of  Union. — The  Preaching  of  Albert  Barnes. — A  Vacation  with 
Dr.  Bushnell. — Prayer  Viewed  in  the  Light  of  the  Christian  Conscious- 
ness.— Intercessory  Prayer. — Hints  Auxiliary  to  Faith  in  Prayer. — The 
Vision  of  Christ. — The  Cross  in  the  Door. — The  Premature  Closing  of  a 
Life's  Work. — What  Do  We  Know  of  the  Heavenly  Life  ? 

♦'  To  say  that  sound  wisdom,  broad  and  exact  learning,  profound  spirituality  and 
practical  adaptation  to  current  needs  are  all  blended  in  these  essays,  and  are  rendered 
the  more  impress! ve  by  a  literary  style  of  such  purity  and  force  as  seldom  are  illustrated 
by  any  one  author,  is  to  say  only  what  is  familiar  already  to  everybody  who  has  read 
anything  from  Prof.  Phelps'  pen.  Such  a  volume  is  a  substantial  addition  to  that  lit- 
erature which,  by  broadening  and  strengthening  the  true  foundation  of  belief  and 
character,  is  'preparing  the  way  of  the  Lord'  upon  earth." — Congregationalist. 


Professor  Phelps'  Books. 


MEN  AND   BOOKS  :  or   Studies  in  Homiletics, 

Lectures  introductory  to  "The  Theory  of  Preach^ 

ING."  One  vol.,  crown,  8vo,  $2.00. 
Professor  Phelps'  second  volume  of  lectures  is  more  popular  and 
general  in  its  application  than  "The  Theory  of  Preaching."  It  is  de- 
voted to  a  discussion  of  the  sources  of  culture  and  power  in  the  profes- 
sion of  the  pulpit,  its  power  to  absorb  and  appropriate  to  its  own  uses 
the  world  of  real  life  in  the  present,  and  the  world  of  the  past,  as  it 
lives  in  books. 

"  It  is  a  book  obviously  free  from  all  padding.  It  is  a  live  book,  animated  as  well 
as  sound  and  instructive,  in  which  conventionalities  are  brushed  aside,  and  the  author 
goes  straight  to  the  marrow  of  the  subject.  No  minister  can  read  it  without  being 
waked  up  to  a  higher  conception  of  the  possibilities  of  his  calling." 

— Professor  George  P.  Fisher. 

«•  It  is  one  of  the  most  helpful  books  in  the  interest  of  self-culture  that  has  ever 
been  written.  While  specially  intended  for  young  clergymen,  it  is  almost  equally 
well  adapted  for  students  in  all  the  liberal  -giroi&ssions.'"— Standard  of  the  Cross. 

"  We  are  sure  that  no  minister  or  candidate  for  the  ministry  can  read  it  without 
profit.  It  is  a  tonic  for  one's  mind  to  read  a  book  so  laden  with  thought  and  sugges- 
tion, and  written  in  a  style  so  fresh,  strong  and  bracing." — Boston  Watchman. 

ENGLISH  STYLE  IN  PUBLIC  DISCOURSE. 

With  Special   Relation   to   the   Usages  of   the  Pulpit. 

i2mo,  $2.00. 

English  Style  is  broad  and  comprehensive,  and  is  particularly  fasci 
nating  from  its  stores  of  happy  illustrations  and  its  frequent  discussions 
of  matters  that  everyone  is  interested  in,  but  which  few  are  competen: 
to  decide  for  themselves.  By  far  the  greater  part  of  the  volume  relates 
to  English  style  in  its  widest  acceptation,  and  the  entire  work  is  a  most 
valuable  contribution  to  the  subject. 

"  It  would  be  difficult  to  match  this  book  for  practical  value  and  literary  merit  in 
the  English  language." — The  Evangelist. 

"This  volume  may  be  read,  and  not  only  read,  but  studied,  with  much  profit  by 
everyone  who  has  occasion  to  speak  in  public  or  to  write  for  the  public.  .  .  .  We 
have  here  a  treatise  on  pulpit  style  broad  enough  to  be  that  and  something  more — a 
satisfactory  treatise  on  all  English  style.  It  will  be  a  great  help  to  any  who  art 
striving  to  learn  how  to  write  and  speak  their  mother-tongue  with  precision,  force  &nd 
grace." — The  Exatniner, 


Professor  Phelps'  Books. 


THE  THEORY    OF    PREACHING:   Lectures 

on  Komiletics.     By  Professor  Austin  Phelps,  D.D. 
One  volume,  8vo,  600  pages,  $2.50. 

This  work  is  the  growth  of  more  than  thirty  years'  practical  ex- 
perience in  teaching,  reinforced  by  suggestions  arising  from  inquiries  of 
students,  which  feature  is  especially  to  be  noted  as  giving  an  intensely 
practical  and  living  character  to  the  discussion.  It  is  probably  the  most 
thorough  and  masterly  treatment  of  the  preacher's  art  that  exists,  cer- 
tainly as  adapted  for  the  American  pulpit  it  is  unequalled.  While  pri- 
marily designed  for  professional  readers,  it  will  be  found  to  contain 
much  that  will  be  of  interest  to  thoughtful  laymen.  The  writings  of  a 
master  of  style  and  of  broad  and  catholic  mind  are  always  fascinating  ;  in 
the  present  case  the  wealth  of  appropriate  and  pointed  illustration  ren- 
ders this  doubly  the  case. 


CRITICAL    NOTICES. 

"  In  the  range  of  Protestant  homiletical  literature,  we  venture  to  affirm  that  its 
equal  cannot  be  found  for  a  conscientious,  scholarly,  and  exhaustive  treatment  of  the 
theory  and  practice  of  preaching.  ...  To  the  treatment  of  his  subject  Dr. 
Phelps  brings  such  qualifications  as  very  few  men  now  living  possess.  His  is  one  of 
those  delicate  and  sensitive  natures  which  are  instinctively  critical,  and  yet  full  of 
what  Matthew  Arnold  happily  calls  sweet  reasonableness.  .  .  .  To  this  character- 
istic graciousness  of  nature  Dr.  Phelps  adds  a  style  which  is  preeminently  adapted  to 
his  special  work.     It  is  nervous,  epigrammatic,  and  racy." 

—  T/te  Examiner  and  Chronicle. 

*'It  is  a  wise,  spirited,  practical  and  devout  treatise  upon  a  topic  of  the  utmost 
consequence  to  pastors  and  people  alike,  and  to  the  salvation  of  mankind.  It  is 
elaborate,  but  not  redundant,  rich  in  the  fruits  of  experience,  yet  thoroughly  timely 
and  current,  and  it  easily  takes  the  very  first  rank  among  volumes  of  its  class." 

—  The  Congregationalist. 

•'  The  volume  is  to  be  commended  to  young  men  as  a  superb  example  of  the  art  in 
which  it  aims  to  instruct  them." — The  Independent. 

"  The  reading  of  it  is  a  mental  tonic.  The  preacher  cannot  but  feel  often  his  heart 
burning  within  him  under  its  influence.  We  could  wish  it  might  be  in  the  hands  of 
every  theological  student  and  of  every  pastor." — The  Watchman. 


*^*  For  sale   by  all  booksellers^  or  sent,  post-paid,  upon  receipt  of 
Pricey  by 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS,  Publishers, 

153-157  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York. 


LIFE    OF    AUSTIN    PHELPS  :    A    Memoir.      By 

Elizabeth  Stuart  Phelps.    Illustrated.    Crown  8vo.    ;^2.oo. 

CONTENTS  :  The  Parents,  and  the  Child  —  Autobiographic,  Boyhood  and 
Early  Manhood  — Marriage,  and  the  Boston  Parish  — From  Boston  to  Andover 
—  The  Professor  —  The  Home  Story  —  The  Preacher,  and  the  Author  —  The 
Cloud  Gathers  — The  Father — Shut  In  —  Last  Years  —  Bar  Harbor -^-Thb 
Still  Hour  —  Letters. 

Professor  Phelps  left  some  autobiographic  material  cover- 
ing a  most  interesting  period  of  his  hfe  up  to  his  departure 
from  Boston  for  Andover.  His  account  of  these  years  of  his 
youth  and  early  manhood  is  intensely  interesting,  and  consti- 
tutes a  very  significant  part  in  the  history  of  his  life-work. 
Mrs.  Ward  has  drawn  a  very  vivid  and  life-like  portrait  of  her 
father,  and  has  made  perfectly  clear  the  reasons  why  the  young 
men  who  came  within  reach  of  his  influence  caught  some  of  his 
ardor  and  enthusiasm  and  became  his  devoted  friends  for  hfe. 
Her  work,  as  any  one  who  is  familiar  with  the  freedom,  vigor, 
and  flexibility  of  her  style  wiH  readily  understand,  has  none  of 
the  stiff  formality  of  the  ordinary  biography.  Its  tone  is  as 
fresh,  intimate,  and  invigorating  as  its  form  is  delightfully  uncon* 
ventional.  Yet  the  characterization  is  terse,  trenchant,  telling, 
so  that  the  figure  of  Professor  Phelps  stands  forth  with  the? 
utmost  clearness,  the  strength  of  his  intellect  and  the  purity 
and  nobility  of  his  moral  nature  being  traced  to  their  sources 
and  being  amply  accounted  for. 


CRITICAL   NOTICES, 

"Mrs.  Ward  has  added  one  more  to  the  scanty  collection  of  almost 
faultless  biographies.  It  reads  like  an  exquisite  poem,  and  is  one  of  the 
few  books  that  we  wish  were  longer.  If  there  be  any  fault  in  this  beauti- 
ful work  it  is  that  the  story  is  made  too  intensely  pathetic.  We  do  not 
envy  the  man  who  can  read  it  without  tears.  A  wonderful  portraiture  — 
in  its  vivid  lights  and  sombre  shadows  of  sorrow  —  is  this  portraiture  of 
Austin  Phelps.  A  genuine  Hfe-likeness  of  a  great  man  —  great  in  scholar- 
ship, great  in  literary  genius,  great  in  heart-power,  great  in  spiritual  in- 
sight, and  great  in  godliness." 

—  Dr.  Theodore  L.  Cuyler  in  The  Evangelist 


LIFE    OF  A  USTIN  PHELPS. 


"His  biography — one  of  the  most  charming  books  of  the  present  time 
—  has  recently  been  published  by  his  accomplished  daughter,  Mrs.  Elizabeth 
Stuart  Phelps  Ward.  That  book  is  a  true  picture  of  one  of  the  rarest  men 
of  this  generation."  —  Christian  Union. 

"  The  book  is  fascinating  as  a  book,  so  skilfully  is  the  story  told,  but 
more  attractive  still  is  the  saintly  character  that  shines  forth  from  its  pages. 
It  is  one  of  the  few  books  of  the  year  that  no  Christian  man  or  woman 
can  afford  not  to  read."  —  The  Examiner. 

"  In  our  judgment  Mrs.  Ward  has  performed  this  service  to  her  father's 
memory  with  a  wisdom,  delicacy,  and  truthfulness  worthy  of  himself,  as 
those  will  perceive  most  fully  who  had  the  privilege  of  knowing  him  during 
his  life."  —  CongregationaliU. 

"  The  book's  chief  value,  from  whatever  point  of  sight  it  may  be  regard- 
ing its  subject,  is  in  connection  with  the  spiritual  life.  The  patience, 
submission,  and  cheerful  calm  of  the  long  period  of  illness  and  disability 
which  closed  his  life  make  an  example  for  the  disappointed  which  the 
author  of  this  memoir  does  well  to  point  by  reference  to  her  father's  essay 
on  *The  Premature  Closing  of  a  Life's  Work.'  "       —  Christian  Inquirer. 

"  The  surpassing  interest  of  the  book  is  in  his  daughter's  portrayal  of 
his  family  life,  and  especially  his  relations  to  his  children.  His  thoughtful 
tenderness,  she  says,  *  ran  on  like  a  beautiful  serial,  from  chapter  to  chapter 
of  our  young  lives.  Elsewhere  we  do  not  turn  such  pages.  It  used  to  be 
our  belief — and  time  has  not  shaken  i^  — that  he  lavished  more  thought 
and  feehng,  more  study  and  sympathy;  more  attention  and  devotion,  upon 
his  children  in  one  year  than  most  of  the  quite  comfortable  young  people 
we  knew  received  from  busy  fathers  in  six-fold  that  time.'  All  this  is  con- 
firmed by  the  details  of  the  picture  she  draws,  and  by  the  letters  which 
make  up  the  second  part  of  the  volume.  One  closes  the  book  with  the 
wish  that  there  were  not  less,  but  more,  of  both  the  loving  portraiture  and 
of  the  outflow  of  a  brave  and  warm  heart  in  these  letters." 

—  Sunday  School  Times. 


***  For  sale   by  all  booksellers,    or  sent,  post-paid,    upon  receipt  of 
i>rice,  by 

CHARLES    SCRIBNER'S   SONS,   Publishers, 
153-157  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York. 


,.._     ;    ^^^v^^^  '^^  .^^-^  A#», 


.  ''S-o 


ret 


■vBilJ 


W 


m%H. 


v^-^v; 


l-*!?^" 
.^.v 


7  .;?r 


ii#y 


